# Commonwealth, Department of Education v. Chester-Upland School District Special Board of Control

> Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · December 27, 2007 · 595 Pa. 595

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/6268218

## Case

- **Full name:** COMMONWEALTH of Pennsylvania, DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION v. CHESTER-UPLAND SCHOOL DISTRICT SPECIAL BOARD OF CONTROL, Michael F.X. Gillin, B. Granville Lash, and Adriene M. Irving. Appeal of Chester-Upland School District Special Board of Control, Michael F.X. Gillin and Adriene M, Irving
- **Court:** Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
- **Decided:** December 27, 2007
- **Citations:** 595 Pa. 595; 939 A.2d 324; 2007 Pa. LEXIS 2900
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Opinion of the court
- **Cited by:** 0 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/6268218

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- holding quashal is appropriate when entity was “out of existence”

## Opinion text

ORDER
PER CURIAM.
AND NOW, this 27th day of December, 2007, the appeals at 111 & 115 MAP 2006 are hereby QUASHED, This court’s affirmance of the Commonwealth Court’s order dated April 16, 2007 by opinion and Order at Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Dep’t of Education v. Chester-Upland Special Board of Control et al., — Pa.-, 938 A.2d 1000 (2007), granting the Department of Education’s Application to Substitute Parties has the effect of substituting the Empowerment Board of Control of the Chester-Upland School District for the Special Board of Control of the Chester-Upland School District. Therefore, the Special Board of Control of the Chester-Upland School District is no longer a party to this appeal. See, e.g., Blackwell v. Commonwealth, State Ethics Comm’n, 523 Pa. 347 , 567 A.2d 630 (1989) (holding quashal is appropriate when entity was “out of existence”).

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/6268218. Public record. Not legal advice.