ShareThis Page
Commonwealth Court ruling upholds Braddock mayor’s vote |

Commonwealth Court ruling upholds Braddock mayor’s vote

Adam Brandolph
| Tuesday, March 31, 2015 1:00 p.m

Braddock Mayor John Fetterman’s deciding vote to fire the borough’s former solicitor will stand, according to a Commonwealth Court ruling last week.

Braddock Council voted 3-3 to fire its former solicitor, M. Lawrence Shields III at a meeting on Feb. 14, 2012. Fetterman cast the deciding vote that terminated Shields’ services.

Shields appealed to the appellate court, arguing that state law says only council had the authority to cast votes, therefore voiding the mayor’s tiebreaker.

Commonwealth Court Judge Cohn Jubelirer wrote that not only did another part of the code authorize the mayor to cast a deciding vote, but required him to do so.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.