Norman A. Oshtry, Esq., Joel E. Oshtry, Esq., Philadelphia, Pa., Attorneys for appellant.
Donald Corbin, Philadelphia, Pa., Sidney Kolitz, Philadelphia, Pa., FOR CITY OF PHILADELPHIA: Miriam B. Brenaman, Esq., Philadelphia, Pa., Attorneys for appellee.
Honorable John A. MacPHAIL, Honorable Madaline Palladino, JJ., Honorable Emil E. Narick, Senior Judge
[ 115 Pa. Commw. Page 261]
Per Curiam Supplemental Opinion:
Appellants' application for reconsideration of the opinion and order of this Court filed November 23, 1987, was granted. We now confirm the order of this Court quashing Appellants' appeal.
Appellants contend that inasmuch as the trial court granted reconsideration of its order of July 24, 1984, which order granted City's motion for summary judgment, its appeal to this Court was timely.
Pa. R.A.P. 1701(b)(3) provides that a trial court may grant reconsideration of an order under certain circumstances, if an appeal has been filed. Here, as our previous opinion noted, no appeal was taken from the order granting judgment to the City. That Rule, therefore,
[ 115 Pa. Commw. Page 262]
does not have the effect of extending the commencement of the 30-day appeal period to the entry of the order denying reconsideration.
We now look at the trial court's order which, Appellants argue, granted reconsideration of the order of July 24, 1984 and thus extended the commencement of the 30-day appeal period.*fn1 The order in question reads as follows:
AND NOW, this 1st day of August, 1984, upon consideration of the foregoing Petition for Reconsideration and on motion of Joel E. Oshtry, Esquire, attorney for Petitioners, a Rule is granted, granting reconsideration of the Order of July 24, 1984 and requiring defendant to ...