From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Bureau of Traffic Safety v. Lyons

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania
Dec 29, 1982
453 A.2d 730 (Pa. Cmmw. Ct. 1982)

Summary

In Lyons, we stated that although both DOT and the court serve the Commonwealth, DOT is not accountable for a court clerk's delay in mailing a certification of a licensee's conviction to DOT. Likewise, we hold that DOT is not accountable for a local police department's delay in mailing the "Report of Refusal."

Summary of this case from Commonwealth v. Maguire

Opinion

Argued September 16, 1982

December 29, 1982.

Motor vehicles — License revocation — Delay.

1. An action by the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation revoking a motor vehicle operator's license may be vacated when administrative delay between a conviction and revocation causes the operator to believe that his privileges will not be impaired and to change his circumstances to his detriment, but the Department cannot be held accountable for delay by a court in informing the Department of a final conviction. [606]

Argued September 16, 1982, before Judges BLATT, WILLIAMS, JR. and CRAIG, sitting as a panel of three.

Appeal, No. 1052 C.D. 1980, from the Order of the Court of Common Pleas of Luzerne County in the case of Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Department of Transportation v. Michael Joseph Lyons, No. 5346 of 1978.

Revocation of motor vehicle operator's license by the Department of Transportation. Licensee appealed to the Court of Common Pleas of Luzerne County. Appeal sustained. BROMINSKI, P.J. Commonwealth appealed to the Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania. Held: Reversed.

Harold H. Cramer, Assistant Counsel, with him Ward T. Williams, Chief Counsel and Jay C. Waldman, General Counsel, for appellant.

Frank Bognet, for appellee.


The Department of Transportation (DOT) appeals an order of the Court of Common Pleas of Luzerne County which vacated a six-month revocation of the motor vehicle operating privileges of appellee Michael Joseph Lyons.

Lyons was cited for a violation of Section 1543 of the Vehicle Code, in operating a motor vehicle while his license was suspended and DOT sent him an official notice of revocation on May 11, 1978. He appealed to the common pleas court, and, at the conclusion of the hearing subsequently held, the court indicated from the bench that it would deny the appeal. It was not until December 28, 1979, however, approximately 17 months later, that the prothonotary's office of the aforesaid court forwarded a certification to DOT of the disposition of Lyons' appeal which indicated that the appeal was denied. On January 14, 1980, DOT reimposed its previously ordered six-month revocation of operating privileges. Lyons then filed a second petition for appeal with the court of common pleas and, after another hearing before a different judge of the same court, the court sustained the appeal and vacated the January 14, 1980 revocation on the basis that DOT had waited too long to reinstate it and that Lyons had relied on that delay to his detriment. The instant appeal by DOT ensued.

Before us DOT argues that the court of common pleas erred in vacating the revocation of Lyons' license because DOT is not chargeable for judicial delay and, even if it were, Lyons failed to show any prejudice caused to him by the delay. Lyons counters that the delay was attributable to DOT and that he was prejudiced thereby because he will be unable to commute to work if his license is now revoked. He notes that he relocated his residence during the delay term concerned and would not have done so had he known that his license would be revoked.

It is well-settled that an action by DOT upon an operator's privileges may be vacated when administrative delay between a conviction and revocation causes the operator to believe that his privileges will not be impaired and to change his circumstances to his detriment. See Department of Transportation v. Rutkowski, 46 Pa. Commw. 64, 406 A.2d 248 (1979); Department of Transportation v. Hosek, 3 Pa. Commw. 580, 284 A.2d 524 (1971). Here, however, the delay was judicial, not administrative. And, although both DOT and the court may be said to serve the Commonwealth, DOT cannot, nor can any other party, be held accountable for the court's delay. Chappell v. Commonwealth, 59 Pa. Commw. 504, 430 A.2d 377 (1981); see Juliano v. Department of Transportation, 68 Pa. Commw. 39, 447 A.2d 1112 (1982) (two year delay between hearing and action on operator's appeal held not be sufficient to vacate suspension). Consequently, "[t]he Department [of Transportation] is chargeable only with delay occurring after it received the certification of conviction." Chappell, 59 Pa. Commw. at 506, 430 A.2d at 379. It received such certification here on December 28, 1979 and reimposed the revocation in less than three weeks, i.e., on January 14, 1980. This was clearly not sufficient administrative delay by DOT to justify the vacating of the penalty imposed.

We will, therefore, reverse the order of the court of common pleas and reinstate the six-month revocation of Lyons' motor vehicle operating privileges.

ORDER

AND NOW, this 29th day of December, 1982, the order of the Court of Common Pleas of Luzerne County in the above-captioned matter is hereby reversed and the action of appellant Department of Transportation revoking the motor vehicle operating privileges of appellee Michael Joseph Lyons for six months is reinstated.


Summaries of

Bureau of Traffic Safety v. Lyons

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania
Dec 29, 1982
453 A.2d 730 (Pa. Cmmw. Ct. 1982)

In Lyons, we stated that although both DOT and the court serve the Commonwealth, DOT is not accountable for a court clerk's delay in mailing a certification of a licensee's conviction to DOT. Likewise, we hold that DOT is not accountable for a local police department's delay in mailing the "Report of Refusal."

Summary of this case from Commonwealth v. Maguire

In Lyons, the Court of Common Pleas of Luzerne County denied an appeal by Mr. Lyons from a suspension of his driver's license pursuant to Section 1543 of the Vehicle Code, 75 Pa. C. S. § 1543.

Summary of this case from Commonwealth v. Davis

In Lyons, however, we held that the Department may not be held accountable for delay attributable to a court's failure to timely certify a conviction to the Department, and, therefore, we may not impute to the Department the delay here.

Summary of this case from Schultz v. Dept. of Trans
Case details for

Bureau of Traffic Safety v. Lyons

Case Details

Full title:Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Department of Transportation, Bureau of…

Court:Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania

Date published: Dec 29, 1982

Citations

453 A.2d 730 (Pa. Cmmw. Ct. 1982)
453 A.2d 730

Citing Cases

Commonwealth v. Davis

Our scope of review in a license suspension case is limited to determining whether the trial court's findings…

Schultz v. Dept. of Trans

We may, of course, vacate revocation of an operator's privileges where an administrative delay between…