Title: John C. Gudzan, Aplt. v. Commonwealth (Per Curiam Order)

State: pennsylvania

Issuer: Pennsylvania Supreme Court

Document:

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA WESTERN DISTRICT JOHN C. GUDZAN Appellant v. COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, Appellee : : : : : : : : : No. 8 WAP 2009 Appeal from the Order of the Commonwealth Court entered March 9, 2009, at No. 731 FR 2006. ORDER PER CURIAM AND NOW, this 3rd day of June, 2009, it is hereby ordered that this appeal, filed on April 9, 2009, from the Commonwealth Court’s March 9, 2009 Order denying Appellant’s application for reconsideration of the Commonwealth Court’s February 5, 2009 Order dismissing appellant’s exceptions as untimely is quashed for lack of jurisdiction. The Commonwealth Court’s March 9, 2009 Order denying reconsideration is not an appealable order. See, e.g., In re Merrick’s Estate, 247 A.2d 786, 787 (Pa. 1968) (quashing appeal from unappealable court order denying reconsideration); Murkey v. Corbin, 533 A.2d 1091 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1987), appeal denied, 554 A.2d 512 (Pa. 1988) (same); Boden v. Tompkins, 452 A.2d 833, 834 (Pa. Super. 1982) (same). Further, the appeal was untimely, as it was not filed within 30 days after the entry of the Commonwealth Court’s February 5, 2009 Order dismissing appellant’s exceptions. See Pa.R.A.P. 903(a); Day v. Civil Service Comm’n of Carlisle, 931 A.2d 646, 651-52 (Pa. 2007) (“The timeliness of an appeal involves jurisdiction.”).