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.

LOUISE FLECK v. AMERICAN FEDERATION STATE (05/27/87)

decided: May 27, 1987.

LOUISE FLECK, PLAINTIFF
v.
AMERICAN FEDERATION OF STATE, COUNTY AND MUNICIPAL EMPLOYEES, AFL-CIO, DAUPHIN COUNTY PENNSYLVANIA PUBLIC EMPLOYEES DISTRICT COUNCIL 90 AND COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, DEPARTMENT OF AGING, DEFENDANTS



Appeal from the Court of Common Pleas of Dauphin County, in case of Louise Fleck v. American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees, AFL-CIO, Dauphin County Pennsylvania Public Employees District Council 90, and Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Department of Aging, No. 3777 S 84.

COUNSEL

J. Jay Cooper, Goldberg, Evans & Katzman, P.C., for petitioner.

Gary R. Gordon, with him, Stuart W. Davidson, Kirschner, Walters, Willig, Weinberg & Dempsey, for defendant, Union.

Susan J. Forney, Deputy Attorney General, with her, Allen C. Warshaw, Chief Deputy Attorney General, Chief, Litigation Section, and LeRoy S. Zimmerman, Attorney General, for defendant, Commonwealth.

Judges Craig and Doyle, and Senior Judge Barbieri, sitting as a panel of three. Opinion by Judge Craig.

Author: Craig

[ 106 Pa. Commw. Page 331]

The Pennsylvania Department of Aging (department) has filed preliminary objections to Louise Fleck's amended complaint, requesting that this court dismiss Ms. Fleck's amended complaint because Ms. Fleck lacks standing to bring this action and has failed to state a cause of action.

Ms. Fleck's amended complaint, filed in the Court of Common Pleas of Dauphin County against her union as

[ 106 Pa. Commw. Page 332]

    well as against the department, alleges that the department had wrongfully denied her Blue Cross and Blue Shield benefits, and that the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) had failed to submit her grievance in a timely manner. The parties stipulated that the matter should be transferred from the trial court to this court, and on April 3, 1985, the trial court, upon consideration of the parties' stipulation, ordered that the case be transferred.

Ms. Fleck, in her amended complaint, averred that during her job interview with the department in July, 1983, a department personnel representative advised her that she would be entitled to fully paid Blue Cross and Blue Shield benefits upon her retirement. Ms. Fleck further alleged that, during her exit interview, on August 26, 1983, a department personnel representative informed her that she would not be eligible for those benefits upon her retirement.*fn1

Ms. Fleck also averred that she contacted AFSCME, on August 29, 1983, concerning the filing of a grievance against the department because of the department's wrongful denial of benefits. AFSCME allegedly did not respond. Ms. Fleck further averred that she again spoke with AFSCME on September 2, 1983 and September 19, 1983 regarding the filing of a grievance, and that AFSCME did not file a grievance on her behalf until March 20, 1984, when that grievance was filed to the third step of the grievance process.

On April 11, 1984, the department denied the grievance because it was untimely. AFSCME, on April 24, 1984, again filed a grievance, on Ms. Fleck's behalf, to the fourth step of the grievance procedure. On ...


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.