decided: November 13, 1984.
THOMAS E. REILLY AND LEONOOR M. ZEHNER, INDIVIDUALLY AND ON BEHALF OF ALL OTHER SIMILARLY SITUATED PLAINTIFFS, RESPONDENTS,
CITY OF PITTSBURGH, A MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, PETITIONER. LISLE A. ZEHNER, INDIVIDUALLY AND ON BEHALF OF ALL OTHER SIMILARLY SITUATED PLAINTIFFS, PETITIONERS, V. TOWNSHIP OF O'HARA, A MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, RESPONDENT
No. 51 W.D. Misc. Docket 1984, No. 55 W.D. Misc. Docket 1984
Marvin A. Fein, Deputy City Sol., D.R. Pellegrini, City Sol., Pittsburgh, for City of Pittsburgh.
Lisle A. Zehner, III, Thomas E. Reilly, Pittsburgh, pro se.
Richard Zomnir, John Elash, Pittsburgh, for O'Hara Tp.
Nix, C.j., and Larsen, Flaherty, McDermott, Hutchinson, Zappala and Papadakos, JJ. Nix, C.j., and McDermott, J., dissent, would not accept plenary jurisdiction, and would remand the case to proceed to a determination on the merits.
Author: Per Curiam
[ 506 Pa. Page 166]
ORDER OF COURT
The Court accepts plenary jurisdiction, 42 Pa.C.S. § 726, and dismisses the Complaints. The language of the statute clearly demonstrates that the legislative intent in the original Home Rule Charter and Optional Plans Law, Act of April 13, 1972, No. 62, § 101, 53 P.S. § 1-101 et seq., was to grant the local communities, except as specifically prohibited
[ 506 Pa. Page 167]
in § 1-302(a)(7), the right to fix rates, but not subjects, of taxation.
© 1998 VersusLaw Inc.