Premier Comp Solutions, LLC v. Dept. of General Services - Commonwealth Court - May 28, 2008
http://www.courts.state.pa.us/OpPosting/CWealth/out/570MD07_5-28-08.pdf
This case involves petitioner's challenge to respondent's award of a single-source contract, in which there was no public notice or competitive bidding, as required by Article III, sec. 22, of the state constitution. The case was brought in the the Commonwealth Court's original jurisdiction.
DGS filed POs, claiming that Premier did not challenge its decision within the 7-day period set out in the regulations. The court held that Premier did not have a legally enforceable interest and thus couldn't challenge the DGS decision in any event.
However, the court did discuss the 7-day appeal period, stating in dicta tha if Premier did have such an interest, then a statute
"foreclosing its right to challenge a contract within such a short period of time [seven (7) days] would implicate due process rights. See Luke v. Cataldi 593 Pa. 461, 932 A.2d 45 (2007). Moreover, such a remedy is not an available or adequate remedy. See Pentlong Corp. v. GLS Capital, Inc., 780 A.2d 734 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2001). If we were to hold otherwise, administrative agency decisions could be made virtually unchallengeable – a decision could made in secret making it impossible for any interested party to take an appeal."
Query: Could this issue be raised in the landlord-tenant context of the 10-day period to appeal an MDJ judgment?
