Lawmakers OK Common Pleas Senior Judges' Support Budgets
The Pennsylvania Senate approved tacked-on procedures for a senior judge operational support grant program along with a House-approved increase to select courts of common pleas in Pennsylvania.
October 26, 2017 at 05:45 PM
5 minute read
The Pennsylvania Senate approved tacked-on procedures for a senior judge operational support grant program along with a House-approved increase to select courts of common pleas in Pennsylvania.
The Cumberland, Wayne, Delaware, Montgomery and Monroe districts are still set to gain one more judge on its district's bench, with the Bucks district set to go from 13 judges in its Court of Common Pleas to 15. However, the Senate concurred with a 49-1 vote on the House's amendment that adds a section to the bill listing the procedures for continuing a senior judge operational grant program.
The grant would be available “based on the level of operational support provided by a county to” senior judges formerly of the judicial district who are regularly or “periodically” assigned to that county or who are assigned under Section 4544 relating to relocation to multicounty investigating grand juries or are visiting senior judges.
Grants would be calculated based on the use of judicial chambers and the use of a law clerk or secretary. The use of judicial chambers would be reimbursed at the rate of $60 per day, law clerk services would be reimbursed at $20 an hour and a secretary would be reimbursed at $12 an hour.
Counties would be reimbursed after the filing of an application by the board of commissioners, or in the absence of commissioners, the executive authority of the county or a mayor of a first class city—which Philadelphia is currently the only county to meet the 1.5 million population requirement.
The application would be certified by the president judge of that county's judicial district and the due date for the application for that calendar year would be established by the court administrator of Pennsylvania.
If the total reimbursement exceeds the amount appropriated by the General Assembly, the Pennsylvania court administrator is allowed to “proportionally reduce” the grant for each county so the total of all grants doesn't exceed the amount appropriated. The bill states that no county can receive more than 20 percent of the amount appropriated for the senior judge operational grants in any fiscal year.
The Pennsylvania Senate approved tacked-on procedures for a senior judge operational support grant program along with a House-approved increase to select courts of common pleas in Pennsylvania.
The Cumberland, Wayne, Delaware, Montgomery and Monroe districts are still set to gain one more judge on its district's bench, with the Bucks district set to go from 13 judges in its Court of Common Pleas to 15. However, the Senate concurred with a 49-1 vote on the House's amendment that adds a section to the bill listing the procedures for continuing a senior judge operational grant program.
The grant would be available “based on the level of operational support provided by a county to” senior judges formerly of the judicial district who are regularly or “periodically” assigned to that county or who are assigned under Section 4544 relating to relocation to multicounty investigating grand juries or are visiting senior judges.
Grants would be calculated based on the use of judicial chambers and the use of a law clerk or secretary. The use of judicial chambers would be reimbursed at the rate of $60 per day, law clerk services would be reimbursed at $20 an hour and a secretary would be reimbursed at $12 an hour.
Counties would be reimbursed after the filing of an application by the board of commissioners, or in the absence of commissioners, the executive authority of the county or a mayor of a first class city—which Philadelphia is currently the only county to meet the 1.5 million population requirement.
The application would be certified by the president judge of that county's judicial district and the due date for the application for that calendar year would be established by the court administrator of Pennsylvania.
If the total reimbursement exceeds the amount appropriated by the General Assembly, the Pennsylvania court administrator is allowed to “proportionally reduce” the grant for each county so the total of all grants doesn't exceed the amount appropriated. The bill states that no county can receive more than 20 percent of the amount appropriated for the senior judge operational grants in any fiscal year.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllCapitol Report: Additional Common Pleas Judges, Professional Licesnsing
Capitol Report: Prescription Coverage, Striking Workers, Stormwater Management
Trending Stories
- 1Gibson Dunn Sued By Crypto Client After Lateral Hire Causes Conflict of Interest
- 2Trump's Solicitor General Expected to 'Flip' Prelogar's Positions at Supreme Court
- 3Pharmacy Lawyers See Promise in NY Regulator's Curbs on PBM Industry
- 4Outgoing USPTO Director Kathi Vidal: ‘We All Want the Country to Be in a Better Place’
- 5Supreme Court Will Review Constitutionality Of FCC's Universal Service Fund
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250