Court Opinion

ID: 9726963
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 13:14:35.60671+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:25:32.272838
License: Public Domain

Justice McCAFFERY,
dissenting.
I dissent from this Court’s per curiam order denying relief for substantially the same reasons set forth in my Dissenting *126Statement in International Association of Fire Fighters Local 22 v. City of Philadelphia, 600 Pa. 621, 969 A.2d 1173, 2009 WL 50644, No. 39 EAP 2008 (filed January 9, 2009).1 Accordingly, I would grant Appellants’ appeal and reverse the lower court decision denying the requested injunction.

. 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.