Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

ROBERT D. ROSSI v. COMMONWEALTH PENNSYLVANIA (09/23/86)

decided: September 23, 1986.

ROBERT D. ROSSI, PETITIONER
v.
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, PENNSYLVANIA STATE POLICE, RESPONDENT



Appeal from the Order of the Pennsylvania State Police in the case of Re: Trooper Robert D. Rossi, Troup "N", Swiftwater Station, dated August 22, 1984.

COUNSEL

Gary M. Lightman, with him, Anthony C. Busillo, II, Mancke, Lightman & Wagner, for petitioner.

Susan J. Forney, Deputy Attorney General, with her, Calvin R. Koons, Deputy Attorney General, Allen C. Warshaw, Senior Deputy Attorney General, Chief, Litigation Section, and LeRoy S. Zimmerman, Attorney General, for respondent.

President Judge Crumlish, Jr., and Judges Rogers, Craig, MacPhail, Doyle, Barry and Palladino. Opinion by Judge Doyle.

Author: Doyle

[ 100 Pa. Commw. Page 640]

This is an appeal by Robert D. Rossi (Petitioner) from a determination of the Pennsylvania State Police which denied Petitioner a hearing on a transfer initiated in conjunction with disciplinary action. On June 29, 1984 the Director of the Aviation Division of the State Police requested permission to transfer Petitioner out of that division. The reason given for the request was that Petitioner was ineffective in performing his duties and was incapable of performing under minimal supervision. Thus, the Director of Aviation recommended that Petitioner be transferred to a more heavily supervised environment. The transfer was approved by the Deputy Commissioner of the State Police on June 29, 1984 the day it was requested; it was announced on July 20, 1984 and became effective on July 26, 1984. Petitioner followed established grievance procedures in challenging the transfer as one not taken in compliance with Field Regulation 3-2 which establishes the policies governing transfers. He was unsuccessful at all three steps in the grievance process. It is the denial of his grievance at the third step which Petitioner appeals, along with

[ 100 Pa. Commw. Page 641]

    the refusal of the State Police to grant him a hearing on the propriety of his transfer.*fn1

The relevant portions of Field Regulation 3-2 read as follows:

SUBJECT: TRANSFERS

2.01 INTRODUCTION

A. Regulated : Transfers within the Pennsylvania State Police are governed by the policies and procedures established in this regulation, or by any other action of the Commissioner.

F. Use : Transfers shall not be used in lieu of appropriate disciplinary action but may be utilized in ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.