Court Opinion

ID: 9702345
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-25 23:07:31.655355+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:21:36.808743
License: Public Domain

DISSENTING OPINION BY
Judge SIMPSON.
I respectfully dissent, because I believe Commonwealth v. Barnett, 199 Pa. 161, 48 A. 976 (1901), in which our Supreme Court construed item veto, controls construction of line item veto in the Administrative Code of Allegheny County.1
In Barnett our Supreme Court defined the term “item” as used in Article IV, Section 16 the Constitution of 1874 in the context of describing “the Executive veto.” *1098The Court specifically rejected the “whole or none” construction of the term and concluded that “item” and “parts” were synonyms as used. Id. at 173-74, 48 A. at 978-79. Thus, the Supreme Court construed an item veto as permitting veto of part of an item. After the Barnett decision, the operative constitutional language was readopted, and it currently exists, in our state Constitution.
In ascertaining legislative intent, Nve may presume that “when a court of last resort has construed the language used in a statute, the General Assembly in subsequent statutes on the same subject matter intends the same construction to be placed upon such language .” 1 Pa.C.S. § 1922(4). Indeed, failure of the legislature, subsequent to a decision of the Supreme Court construing a statute, to change by legislative action the law as interpreted by the court creates a presumption that the interpretation was in accord with intent. Commonwealth v. Wanamaker, 450 Pa. 77, 296 A.2d 618 (1972); In re Employees of Uniontown Hospital Ass’n, 432 Pa. 146, 247 A.2d 621 (1968).
Absent a clear expression to the contrary, we should strive for predictability by following our Supreme .Court and construing “item” and “parts” as synonymous here. Departure from judicial construction, and espousal of a rejected “whole or none” construction, prompt my dissent.
Judge COHN joins in this dissent.

. Article VIII, Section 801.07(C) of the Administrative Code of Allegheny County, titled Submission of Adopted Annual Budgets to Chief Executive; Line Item Veto, provides, with emphasis added:
If the Chief Executive disapproves of any item in the adopted budget(s) or amendments) to the adopted budget(s), then the Chief Executive may veto any such item by *1098striking or otherwise indicating disapproval of such item and by returning the budgets or amendment(s) to the budgets within seven (7) Business Days after receiving it to the Council Clerk with an attached writing indicating the specific line items which -are disapproved and the objections to such items. The objections shall be part of the County Council proceedings. The Council Clerk shall make an official record of the line item veto(s) and return of the budget(s) or amendment(s) to the budget(s). Any parts of the budget(s) or amendments) to the budget not vetoed shall enter into effect.
Allegheny County, Pa., Administrative Code of Allegheny County (June 20, 2000).