Goldman v. Kelly

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Goldman v. Kelly

422 A.2d 562, 281 Pa. Super. 464, 1980 Pa. Super. LEXIS 3229

CourtSuperior Court of Pennsylvania

DecidedOctober 10, 1980

DocketNo. 2166

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 422 A.2d 562 (Goldman v. Kelly) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Superior Court of Pennsylvania primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Goldman v. Kelly, 422 A.2d 562, 281 Pa. Super. 464, 1980 Pa. Super. LEXIS 3229 (Pa. Ct. App. 1980).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

On September 17, 1979, the Court of Common Pleas of Bucks County issued a preliminary injunction against Bensa-lem Township prohibiting the Township from erecting any signs outside the Carriage Stop Apartments, stating that the apartments were unsafe and did not comply with the Township’s fire code. On October 9, 1979, the lower court also ordered that the preliminary injunction would remain in effect and would not be subject to automatic supersedeas pursuant to Pa.R.A.P. 1736(b). The Township now appeals from both of these orders, and argues: 1) that the injunction issued by the lower court constitutes an unconstitutional prior restraint of free speech as guaranteed by the Pennsylvania and United States Constitutions, and 2) that the lower court’s order denying automatic supersedeas is not warranted by appellee’s petition, violates the Pennsylvania Rules of Appellate Procedure, and denies the Township’s constitutional right to procedural due process.

We shall not address the merits of the Township’s appeal but shall transfer this case, pursuant to Pa.R.A.P. 751, to the Commonwealth Court, since it has exclusive jurisdiction over cases involving the interpretation of statutes regulating the affairs of political subdivisions and municipalities. Act of July 9, 1976 P.L. 586, No. 142, § 2, as amended, Act of April 28, 1978, P.L. 202, No. 53, § 10(7), 42 Pa.C.S.A. § 762(a)(4)(i)(A) (Purdon’s 1980 Pamphlet).

So ordered.

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

PER CURIAM:

On September 17, 1979, the Court of Common Pleas of Bucks County issued a preliminary injunction against Bensa-lem Township prohibiting the Township from erecting any signs outside the Carriage Stop Apartments, stating that the apartments were unsafe and did not comply with the Township’s fire code. On October 9, 1979, the lower court also ordered that the preliminary injunction would remain in effect and would not be subject to automatic supersedeas pursuant to Pa.R.A.P. 1736(b). The Township now appeals from both of these orders, and argues: 1) that the injunction issued by the lower court constitutes an unconstitutional prior restraint of free speech as guaranteed by the Pennsylvania and United States Constitutions, and 2) that the lower court’s order denying automatic supersedeas is not warranted by appellee’s petition, violates the Pennsylvania Rules of Appellate Procedure, and denies the Township’s constitutional right to procedural due process.

We shall not address the merits of the Township’s appeal but shall transfer this case, pursuant to Pa.R.A.P. 751, to the Commonwealth Court, since it has exclusive jurisdiction over cases involving the interpretation of statutes regulating the affairs of political subdivisions and municipalities. Act of July 9, 1976 P.L. 586, No. 142, § 2, as amended, Act of April 28, 1978, P.L. 202, No. 53, § 10(7), 42 Pa.C.S.A. § 762(a)(4)(i)(A) (Purdon’s 1980 Pamphlet).

So ordered.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

422 A.2d 562, 281 Pa. Super. 464, 1980 Pa. Super. LEXIS 3229, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/goldman-v-kelly-pasuperct-1980.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack