Bara v. Personnel Appeal Board

Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas

Bara v. Personnel Appeal Board

30 Conn. Supp. 333

CourtPennsylvania Court of Common Pleas

DecidedDecember 19, 1973

DocketFile No. 109824

StatusPublished

This text of 30 Conn. Supp. 333 (Bara v. Personnel Appeal Board) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Bara v. Personnel Appeal Board, 30 Conn. Supp. 333 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1973).

Pincite

Opinion

Kinmonth, J.

The plaintiff’s appeal from the defendant hoard is in two counts. The demurrer to the first count is on the ground that it fails to allege facts sufficient to justify a nullification or reversal of the defendant’s decision. A prayer for relief is demurred to on the ground that the court lacks jurisdiction to grant declaratory relief in this proceeding.

The first, count alleges that the defendant hoard, which heard the plaintiff’s appeal from his dismissal on February 8, 1973, and March 8, 1973, failed to render its decision within ninety days from the date of the hearing as required by § 5-202 (c) of the General Statutes. If it is assumed that the board did not render its decision within ninety days, the failure of the board to do so would not constitute a ground for invalidating its decision. Romano v. Connecticut State Welfare Dept., 4 Conn. Cir. Ct. 138,143.

[334]*334As to the ground of demurrer that the court lacks jurisdiction to grant a declaratory judgment, § 4-183 (g) of the Uniform Administrative Procedure Act (General Statutes, c. 54) empowers the court to affirm, reverse, or modify an agency’s decision or to remand the case to the agency for further proceedings. An appeal from an administrative agency is a special statutory proceeding and not a “civil action” as is a declaratory judgment ease. Bank Building & Equipment Corporation v. Architectural Examining Board, 153 Conn. 121, 124.

For the above reasons the demurrer is sustained.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Kinmonth, J.

The plaintiff’s appeal from the defendant hoard is in two counts. The demurrer to the first count is on the ground that it fails to allege facts sufficient to justify a nullification or reversal of the defendant’s decision. A prayer for relief is demurred to on the ground that the court lacks jurisdiction to grant declaratory relief in this proceeding.

The first, count alleges that the defendant hoard, which heard the plaintiff’s appeal from his dismissal on February 8, 1973, and March 8, 1973, failed to render its decision within ninety days from the date of the hearing as required by § 5-202 (c) of the General Statutes. If it is assumed that the board did not render its decision within ninety days, the failure of the board to do so would not constitute a ground for invalidating its decision. Romano v. Connecticut State Welfare Dept., 4 Conn. Cir. Ct. 138,143.

[334]*334As to the ground of demurrer that the court lacks jurisdiction to grant a declaratory judgment, § 4-183 (g) of the Uniform Administrative Procedure Act (General Statutes, c. 54) empowers the court to affirm, reverse, or modify an agency’s decision or to remand the case to the agency for further proceedings. An appeal from an administrative agency is a special statutory proceeding and not a “civil action” as is a declaratory judgment ease. Bank Building & Equipment Corporation v. Architectural Examining Board, 153 Conn. 121, 124.

For the above reasons the demurrer is sustained.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

30 Conn. Supp. 333, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bara-v-personnel-appeal-board-pactcompl-1973.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack