Opinion ID: 1548056
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Proceedings in the Commonwealth Court

Text: Subsequent to consolidating these three cases, the Commonwealth Court, on April 25, 1989, issued an order inviting the parties to submit supplemental briefs asking specifically that the parties examine a potential affirmative defense in the context of the Rehabilitation Act. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Dep't of Transp., Bureau of Driver Licensing v. Brown, 125 Pa.Commw. 372, 375, 558 A.2d 121, 123 (1989). The Commonwealth Court stated that although none of these drivers raised the defense of the Rehabilitation Act, the judges . . . upheld similar affirmative defenses by concluding that [the Department's] applicable regulations were unreasonable.. . . Id. The Commonwealth Court found that the Rehabilitation Act was applicable in this case and remanded the matter to the trial court to make findings of fact concerning (1) whether there is an appreciable risk that the drivers are not competent to drive . . .; and, (2) whether an accommodation of these individuals, and those similarly situated, would unduly burden the Department. Id. at 378, 558 A.2d at 124.