LSB v. City of Pgh., Apl. of: City of Pgh.

• Court: Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
• Decided: June 18, 2024
• Docket: 15 WAP 2023
• Status: Published

Opinion

[J-25-2024] IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA WESTERN DISTRICT

LANDLORD SERVICE BUREAU, INC.; : No. 15 WAP 2023 MICHELLE WILLIAMS; COLLYER REALTY : COMPANY, D/B/A GALASSO REAL : Appeal from the Order of the ESTATE SERVICES; SANTO : Commonwealth Court entered POLICICHIO; CROWN REAL ESTATE : March 17, 2023, at No. 1026 CD AND MANAGEMENT SERVICES : 2021, reversing the Order of the : Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny : County entered August 17, 2021, at v. : No. GD 15-023074. : : ARGUED: April 9, 2024 THE CITY OF PITTSBURGH AND : COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PITTSBURGH : : : REALTORS ASSOCIATION OF : METROPOLITAN PITTSBURGH, : A PENNSYLVANIA CORPORATION : NOT FOR PROFIT : : : v. : : : THE CITY OF PITTSBURGH : : : APARTMENT ASSOCIATION OF : METROPOLITAN PITTSBURGH, : A PENNSYLVANIA CORPORATION : NOT FOR PROFIT : : : v. : : : THE CITY OF PITTSBURGH, : A HOME RULE CITY : : : APPEAL OF: THE CITY OF PITTSBURGH : AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF : PITTSBURGH :

ORDER

PER CURIAM DECIDED: JUNE 18, 2024 AND NOW, this 18th day of June, 2024, the matter before the Court having

become moot by the City of Pittsburgh’s wholesale replacement of the 2015 Residential

Housing Rental Permit Program Ordinance (Rental Ordinance), which is the subject of

the underlying consolidated action, with a new ordinance (Ordinance 2022-0270) that

does not contain the Rental Ordinance provisions that the Commonwealth Court below

found to violate Section 2962(f) of the Home Rule Charter and Optional Plans Law,

53 Pa. C.S. § 2962(f), such that the City now seeks merely an advisory opinion, it is

hereby ORDERED that the Commonwealth Court’s Order, dated March 17, 2023, is

VACATED, the appeal before this Court is DISMISSED, and this matter is REMANDED

to the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County to dismiss the complaints in the

consolidated action. See In re Gross, 382 A.2d 116 (Pa. 1978) (observing that legal

question can become moot on appeal due to intervening change in ordinance or statute);

Salisbury Twp. v. Sun Oil Co., 179 A.2d 195 (Pa. 1962) (holding challenge to ordinance

moot on appeal due to expiration of ordinance); N. Pa. Pwr. Co. v. Pa. Pub. Util. Comm’n,

5 A.2d 133 (Pa. 1939) (holding constitutional challenge to statute moot on appeal due to

intervening amendment enacted by legislature), overruled on other grounds, York v. Pa.

Pub. Util. Comm’n, 295 A.2d 825 (Pa. 1972); see also Mt. Lebanon v. Cnty. Bd. of

Elections of Allegheny Cnty., 368 A.2d 648 (Pa. 1977) (holding that “court should not offer

advisory opinions” on proposed legislation not in effect).

Justice Wecht files a dissenting statement in which Justice Donohue joins.

[J-25-2024] - 2