Henrietta Beattie, et al. v. Allegheny County, PA, Daniel Onorato, et al. (Majority Opinion)

State: Pennsylvania

Docket No: 8WAP2005

Case Date: 10/12/2006

Plaintiff: Henrietta Beattie, et al.

Defendant: Allegheny County, PA, Daniel Onorato, et al. (Majority Opinion)

Preview:[J-87B-2005] IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA WESTERN DISTRICT CAPPY, C.J., CASTILLE, NIGRO, NEWMAN, SAYLOR, EAKIN, BAER, JJ. HENRIETTA BEATTIE, GERTRUDE ELLIS, KAREN RUMMEL, SANDRA WALLS, KENNETH PIERCE, AND MON VALLEY UNEMPLOYED COMMITTEE, ON THEIR OWN BEHALF AND ON BEHALF OF ALL OTHERS SIMILARLY SITUATED, Appellants v. : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : No. 8 WAP 2005

Appeal from the Order of the Commonwealth Court entered April 15, 2004 at No. 1008 CD 2003, affirming the Order of the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County entered March 27, 2003 at No. GD01-11149. 847 A.2d 185 (Pa.Cmwlth.Ct. 2004)

ALLEGHENY COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA, DANIEL ONORATO, ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE AND MANATRON, INC., Appellees

ARGUED: September 12, 2005

OPINION

MR. JUSTICE SAYLOR

DECIDED: OCTOBER 11, 2006

This appeal raises the question of whether taxpayers may bypass administrative remedies and maintain an equitable class action in the trial court to assert a Uniformity Clause-based challenge to the real estate assessment system used by Allegheny County.

I. Appellants filed a class-action equitable complaint in the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County, alleging that their properties had been over-assessed by the County, and stating more generally that the County's assessment system caused approximately 80,000 lower-valued homes to be over-assessed and resulted in an under-assessment of a significant number of higher-valued homes. In challenging the constitutionality of the assessment under the Uniformity Clause, see PA. CONST. art. VIII,

Download j-87b-2005mo.pdf