Municipal Auth. of the City of Monongahela, Aplt v. Carroll Township (Per Curiam Order)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

[J-93-2001] IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA WESTERN DISTRICT MUNICIPAL AUTHORITY OF THE CITY : 14 WAP 2001 OF MONONGAHELA AND THE CITY OF : MONONGAHELA, : Appeal from the Order of the : Commonwealth Court entered August 29, Appellants : 2000, at No. 1720 C.D. 1999, reversing : the order of the Court of Common Pleas of : Allegheny County entered June 17, 1999 v. : at No. GD-99-00708. : : CARROLL TOWNSHIP AUTHORITY AND : THE TOWNSHIP OF CARROLL, : ARGUED: September 10, 2001 : Appellees : ORDER PER CURIAM DECIDED: JANUARY 22, 2002 And now, this 22nd day of January, 2002, the order of the Commonwealth Court is AFFIRMED. We specifically state that we do not adopt the rationale of the Commonwealth Court. See Commonwealth v. Tilghman, 673 A.2d 898, 904 (Pa. 1996). Furthermore, we note that it appears that 42 Pa.C.S. § 7319(3), read in conjunction with 42 Pa.C.S. § 7304(a), dictates that venue for appeals from arbitration awards lies with the trial court that initially ordered the parties to proceed to arbitration. However, the issue of the applicability of § 7319(3) to this matter was waived via a concession made by Appellees before the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County. See Allegheny County CCP, slip op. dated 1/25/1999, at 12. Thus, we are unable to explore the parameters of § 7319(3) by way of a full opinion. Former Chief Justice Flaherty did not participate in the decision of this case.

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.