Appeal of Feldman
| Decision Date | 13 February 1976 |
| Parties | Appeal of Robert M. FELDMAN. |
| Court | Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court |
Jay M. Goldstein, Upper Darby, for appellant.
Joseph A. Damico, Jr., Media, for appellee.
Before MENCER, ROGERS and BLATT, JJ.
Robert M. Feldman, a temporary professional employee of the Rose Tree Media School District, was notified that his performance had been rated unsatisfactory, that the School Board proposed to dismiss him, and that a hearing would be conducted upon his request. 1
At the Board hearing subsequently convened, the School District's solicitor tried the case in support of the proposed action of dismissal. The same attorney thereafter either prepared or assisted in the preparation of the Board's adjudication of dismissal. Mr. Feldman appealed the Board's adjudication to the Court of Common Pleas contending that the unsatisfactory rating was made improperly and that the dual role of the Board's solicitor violated his, Feldman's, due process right to a fair hearing by the Board. The court below affirmed and Mr. Feldman has appealed, raising the same issues as before.
We do not reach the merits. In Horn v. Township of Hilltown, --- Pa. ---, 337 A.2d 858 (1975), our Supreme Court held that the possibility of prejudice in proceedings in which the same counsel represented both a Zoning Hearing Board and a municipality having an interest in the litigation was a denial of due process. Following Horn, this Court held that it was equally a denial of due process for counsel of the Pennsylvania Human Relations Commission to represent complainants at a Commission hearing and to afford legal services to the Commission in adjudicating the complaint. Pennsylvania Human Relations Commission v. Feeser, --- Pa.Cmwlth. ---, 341 A.2d 584 (1975). In the instant case the learned judge of the court below, without the benefit of the Horn and Feeser decisions and relying on decisions of our Court that such dual representation was not a denial of due process in the absence of a showing of harm, nevertheless remarked '(a)lthough making this finding, (of the absence of harm), this Court would urge all school districts, wherever possible, to appoint counsel in similar situations that occur in the future, as so to avoid even the appearance of impropriety.'
The School District argues that Horn is distinguishable on the gound that...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Schmidt v. Independent School Dist. No. 1, Aitkin
...right to be heard in a meaningful, impartial manner. Other jurisdictions have reached a similar conclusion. In Appeal of Feldman, 21 Pa.Commw. 451, 346 A.2d 895 (1975), for example, the school district's solicitor prosecuted and prepared or assisted in preparation of the board's adjudicatio......
-
Alex v. Allen
...to meet the requirements of procedural due process; it was not necessary for the plaintiff to show actual prejudice. Appeal of Feldman, 346 A.2d 895 (1975) (Pa. Comm. Court), is even closer to the facts of this case. The plaintiff, a temporary professional school employee, was notified that......
-
Com., Human Relations Commission v. Thorp, Reed and Armstrong
...126, 252 A.2d 704 (1969); English v. North East Board of Education, 22 Pa.Cmwlth. 240, 348 A.2d 494 (1975); In re: Appeal of Feldman, 21 Pa.Cmwlth. 451, 346 A.2d 895 (1975); and most notably Pennsylvania Relations Commission v. Feeser, 20 Pa.Cmwlth. 406, 341 A.2d 584 (1975). Instead, we hav......
-
Com., Dept. of State v. Chairman
...after the decisional process of a tribunal is complete may not deny due process. See Pollock, supra. But see In Re: Appeal of Feldman, 21 Pa.Cmwlth. 451, 346 A.2d 895 (1975) (school board's solicitor tried case and prepared or assisted in preparing adjudication). The actions of the Board's ......