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.

EDWARD SWEARER v. LEO C. KAROLESKI ET AL. (08/17/89)

filed: August 17, 1989.

EDWARD SWEARER, JR., APPELLANT
v.
LEO C. KAROLESKI ET AL., APPELLEES



Appeal from Common Pleas Court, Clearfield County; Honorable John K. Reilly, Jr., Judge.

COUNSEL

Thomas G. Wagner, Esq., St. Marys, Pennsylvania, for Appellant.

Edward V. Cherry, Esq., Paula M. Cherry, Esq., DuBois, Pennsylvania, for Appellee.

Before: Honorable Francis A. Barry, Judge, Honorable James Gardner Colins, Judge (p.), Honorable Jacob Kalish, Senior Judge.

Author: Barry

[ 128 Pa. Commw. Page 336]

Opinion

Opinion BY JUDGE BARRY

Edward Swearer, Jr., appeals a Clearfield County Common Pleas Court order granting the DuBois City Council's (DuBois) motion to dismiss Swearer's mandamus complaint.*fn1 We reverse and remand.

DuBois advertised that the city was accepting police officer applications. A "position fact sheet" was made available to the public, outlining job qualifications and responsibilities. Prospective applicants were required to pass a written examination, physical agility test, oral interview,

[ 128 Pa. Commw. Page 337]

    medical examination, background examination, and a psychological examination.

Swearer returned his completed application, sat for the written examination, and attained 81.37 points out of 100. His score of 92.76 reflected the veterans' preference adjustment consistent with the City's personnel regulations*fn2 and Section 7103(b) of the act relating to veterans' preference.*fn3

Swearer then completed the psychological examination. Applicants were advised that the test would be scored to determine "whether the candidate had the personality traits normally associated with effective police work," and that it was designed to detect misrepresentations that would disqualify a candidate.*fn4 Applicants were graded into five categories: Highly Recommended, Recommended, Acceptable, Poor Risk, and Do Not Hire. Swearer was ...


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.