Title: Philadelphia Fire Firghters Union, Local 22, International Assoc. of Firefighters, AFL-CIO, by its guardians ad litem, Brian McBride, President, William Gault, Vice President, and Ray Clothier, III, Vice President, et al., Aplts. v. The City of Philadelphia, Honorable Michael A. Nutter, Camille Cates Bennett and Lloyd Ayers (Dissenting Statement)

State: pennsylvania

Issuer: Pennsylvania Supreme Court

Document:

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA EASTERN DISTRICT PHILADELPHIA FIRE FIGHTERS' UNION, LOCAL 22, ET AL., Appellants v. THE CITY OF PHILADELPHIA, ET AL., Appellees : : : : : : : : : : : : No. 1 EAP 2009 Application for Injunctive Relief Pending Appeal DISSENTING STATEMENT MR. JUSTICE McCAFFERY FILED: January 9, 2009 I dissent from this Court’s per curiam order denying relief for substantially the same reasons set forth in my Dissenting Statement in International Association of Fire Fighters Local 22 v. City of Philadelphia, No. 39 EAP 2008 (Pa. filed January 9, 2009).1 Accordingly, I would grant Appellants’ appeal and reverse the lower court decision denying the requested injunction. 1 Procedurally, 39 EAP 2008 and 1 EAP 2009 are different. In 39 EAP 2008, Appellants filed an emergency application in this Court for what amounts to a stay of the Commonwealth Court’s order in the underlying dispute. In 1 EAP 2009, Appellants essentially filed an appeal of the Commonwealth Court’s affirming the trial court’s denial of Appellants’ request for a preliminary injunction. Even with our deferential standard of review of orders disposing of grants or denials of requests for prohibitory preliminary injunctions, I believe that the extraordinary circumstance presented here, which involves the potential loss of life and limb as a result of the denial of the preliminary injunction, compels the conclusion that the lower court’s order is not based on the exercise of legally sustainable reason.