Case Title: Appeal of: Chester-Upland SD (Per Curiam Order)

Citation: 

Docket Number: 111 AND 115 MAP 2006

State: pennsylvania

Court: Pennsylvania Supreme Court

Date: 2007-12-27T00:00:00Z

Document:
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA MIDDLE DISTRICT COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION v. CHESTER-UPLAND SCHOOL DISTRICT SPECIAL BOARD OF CONTROL, MICHAEL F.X. GILLIN, B. GRANVILLE LASH, AND ADRIENNE M. IRVING APPEAL OF: CHESTER-UPLAND SCHOOL DISTRICT SPECIAL BOARD OF CONTROL, MICHAEL F. X. GILLIN AND ADRIENE M. IRVING : : : : : : : : : : : : : : Nos. 111 & 115 MAP 2006 Appeal from the Orders of the Commonwealth Court dated October 16 and October 23, 2006 at No. 496 M.D. 2005 ORDER PER CURIAM AND NOW, this 27th day of December, 2007, the appeals at 111 & 115 MAP 2006 are hereby QUASHED. This court’s affirmance of the Commonwealth Court’s order dated April 16, 2007 by opinion and Order at Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Dep’t of Education v. Chester-Upland Special Board of Control et al., 42 MAP 2007, ___ A.2d ____ (Pa. 2007), granting the Department of Education’s Application to Substitute Parties has the effect of substituting the Empowerment Board of Control of the Chester-Upland School District for the Special Board of Control of the Chester-Upland School District. Therefore, the Special Board of Control of the Chester-Upland School District is no longer a party to this appeal. See, e.g., Blackwell v. Commonwealth, States Ethics Comm’n, 567 A.2d 630 (Pa. 1989) (holding quashal is appropriate when entity was “out of existence”).