Stumpp v. Stroudsburg Municipal Authority
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
CAPPY, Justice.
The question in this appeal is whether appellee Clarence L. Stumpp, as a public employee who is neither protected by civil service regulations nor covered by any collective bargaining agreement, has the right to notice and a hearing as a result of his dismissal. Because we find that the Commonwealth Court erred in determining that Appellee had a “property right” in his employment, we reverse.
Appellee was an employee of the Stroudsburg Municipal Authority (“Authority”) as manager of its water treatment plant. On February 7, 1992, the Authority sent a letter…
Also in this document: Concurrence.
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Geary v. United States Steel Corp.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1974
- Darlington v. General ElectricSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1986
- Paul v. Lankenau HospitalSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1990
- Scott v. Philadelphia Parking AuthoritySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1960
- Krajsa v. Keypunch, Inc.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1993
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by75 opinions
- Karen Elmore v. Donald Cleary Eugene Turner Kenneth Naugle and Huntington TownshipCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2005
- Werner v. ZazycznySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1996
- Walden v. Saint Gobain Corp.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2004
- Miller v. Clinton CountyCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2008
- Hennessy v. SantiagoSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1998
70 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.