 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Commonwealth v. Lal3/16/2004
Adhinayak Roby Lal (Appellant) appeals from orders of the Court of Common Pleas of Chester County finding him guilty of violations of the Borough of Modena's (Borough) property maintenance code. By order dated February 25, 2003, the trial court found Appellant guilty of fourteen housing code violations and assessed a $1000 fine plus costs for each violation. By opinion of April 9, 2003, the court denied Appellant's motion for reconsideration.
Appellant, a physician, owns property at 19 Mortonville Road in the Borough. Dr. Amrit Lal is Appellant's father and manages Appellant's property pursuant to a power of attorney. On December 16, 2001, Edwin Groce, a Borough code officer and also the Borough council president, met with Dr. Amrit Lal and inspected Appellant's property, pointing out several violations of the Borough's property maintenance code relating to trash and unsafe conditions and requesting that the violations be corrected. On December 29, 2001, a building on the property burned down. At the time of the fire Appellant had not yet corrected the cited violations, and in January 2002 Appellant was notified of the continuing violations and of the need to demolish the destroyed building.
By letter dated February 3, 2002, Groce notified Appellant that pursuant to Section 108.1 of the Borough's maintenance code, he had fifteen days in which to submit to the Borough a contract for demolition of the destroyed building and clean-up of the property. The notice stated that Appellant had twenty days in which to appeal and that Groce had personally delivered a copy of the notice to Dr. Amrit Lal. A second copy of the notice was sent by certified mail and was received by Appellant on February 12, 2002. On or about February 10, 2002, Groce posted a demolition notice at the property stating that Appellant had fifteen days to submit a demolition contract to the Borough and sixty days to complete it.
In March 2002 Dr. Amrit Lal received an estimate and a proposed contract for the demolition and clean-up from Anthony Formica, owner of the A.S. Formica Co. Dr. Amrit Lal sent the contract to the Borough for its approval, but the contract was not signed or otherwise concluded and the Borough took no further action. Formica contacted Groce concerning Borough requirements for demolition permits, and he informed Groce that he had not yet received a signed contract from Dr. Amrit Lal. By April 2002 the building had not been demolished and the other violations had not yet been corrected; consequently, from April 3 -18, 2002 Groce issued fifteen citations for Appellant's failure to comply with the demolition order and to correct the other violations. The citations were filed with the local district justice on April 19, 2002. Formica began demolition of the building on May 10 and thereafter completed a partial clean-up.
On September 17, 2002, the district justice found Appellant guilty of each violation and assessed a fine of $100 plus court costs for each violation. At the February 25, 2003 de novo hearing, counsel for Appellant presented a motion to dismiss all of the charges asserting that because Groce was the elected Borough council president he was prohibited from acting also as a code enforcement officer pursuant to Section 1104 of The Borough Code, as amended, 53 P.S. §46104. The trial court denied the motion as untimely; however, testimony established that Modena had a population of only 610 and therefore that Groce could properly serve simultaneously as council president and as code enforcement officer. After hearing testimony from Groce, Formica and Dr. Amrit Lal, the court found Appellant guilty of fourteen of the citations and imposed a $1000 fine plus costs for each
Page 1 2 3 Pennsylvania DUI Attorneys
DUI Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|