# Telly v. Pennridge School District Board of School Directors

> Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · August 20, 2012 · 617 Pa. 473

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/4966183

## Case

- **Full name:** Diane TELLY, Suzanne Clarke, Jennifer Crocus, Susan Paff, Judith Patton, Kathleen Percetti, Patricia H. Siwert, and Sue Snyder v. PENNRIDGE SCHOOL DISTRICT BOARD OF SCHOOL DIRECTORS Sherry Labs, Denise Betts, Nancy Jones, Carol Scarborough, Kari Williams Tysinski, Dorothy Campana, and John P. Mohan v. Central Bucks School District Board of School Directors New Britain Township, Intervenor Warrington Township, Intervenor Appeal of Diane Telly, Suzanne Clarke, Jennifer Crocus, Susan Paff, Judith Patton, Kathleen Percetti, Patricia H. Siwert, Sue Snyder, Sherry Labs, Denise Betts, Nancy Jones, Carol Scarborough, Kari Williams Tysinski, Dorothy Campana, and John P. Mohan, Diane Telly, Suzanne Clarke, Jennifer Crocus, Susan Paff, Judith Patton, Kathleen Percetti, Patricia H. Siwert, and Sue Snyder v. Pennridge School District Board of School Directors Sherry Labs, Denise Betts, Nancy Jones, Carol Scarborough, Kari Williams Tysinski, Dorothy Campana, and John P. Mohan v. Central Bucks School District Board of School Directors New Britain Township, Intervenor Warrington Township, Intervenor. Cross Appeal of New Britain Township, Intervenor
- **Court:** Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
- **Decided:** August 20, 2012
- **Citations:** 617 Pa. 473; 53 A.3d 705
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Eakin
- **Judges:** Baer, Castille, Eakin, Joining, McCaffery, Melvin, Saylor, Todd
- **Cited by:** 1 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/4966183

## Opinion text

Justice EAKIN,
concurring.
I concur with the majority; the compensation rates adopted by the Pennridge and Central Bucks School Boards were so low as to deprive the tax collectors of the ability to perform their basic duties. In light of the arguments made, I write to posit the caveat that we cannot permit tax collectors to unilaterally expand their role from tax collector to customer service representative and expect those self-imposed duties to be the subject of mandatory compensation. School boards clearly have the authority to reduce the rate of compensation, but not to the extent of prohibiting tax collectors from performing their statutory duties. School Boards need not be made to compensate for non-statutory *720 duties. Customer service is a very nice thing, but when tax dollars are tight, it is a luxury item, not a statutory duty, and what is fair and reasonable compensation must be based on the statutorily-required responsibilities of tax collectors alone. If the Board wishes to pay for more, it certainly may, but if it does not, it cannot be made to pay for more than the duties set forth by the Legislature.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/4966183. Public record. Not legal advice.