Case Title: P.H.R.C. v. School District of Philadelphia (Concurring Opinion)

Citation: 

Docket Number: 

State: pennsylvania

Court: Pennsylvania Supreme Court

Date: 1999-05-19T00:00:00Z

Document:
[J-21-1998] IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA EASTERN DISTRICT PENNSYLVANIA HUMAN RELATIONS COMMISSION, v. SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PHILADELPHIA, ET AL., v. COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, et al. PETITION OF: Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and Thomas J. Ridge, Governor : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : 119 E.D. Miscellaneous Docket 1996 Appeal from the order of the Commonwealth Court at No. 1056 C.D. 1973 667 A.2d 1173 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 1995) ARGUED: FEBRUARY 3, 1998: CONCURRING OPINION MR. JUSTICE NIGRO DECIDED: May 19, 1999 I concur in the result reached by the majority. I write separately, however, because I cannot agree that the Commonwealth Court did not have original jurisdiction in this enforcement proceeding. In an enforcement proceeding the inquiry is limited to whether the order itself was complied with, not whether the order was properly entered on the merits. Due to its unique nature, I would find that an enforcement proceeding falls within the Commonwealth Court’s original jurisdiction. Nevertheless, I agree with the majority that, in this case, joinder of the Commonwealth, Governor Ridge, the City of Philadelphia, 2 and Mayor Rendell was improper, not only because it infused a new claim into the case but, because joinder of these parties was not necessary for the Commonwealth Court to enforce the Commission’s order.