19 A.3d 549
Pa. Commw. Ct.2011Background
- Harrah's Chester sought approval to conduct telephone account wagering (AWS) under 4 P.S. § 325.218(b); petition amended May 25, 2010.
- Philadelphia Park (Bensalem Racing and Keystone Turf) petitioned to intervene, arguing its right/interest under GRAPP to ensure fair competition and protect its market.
- Harness Commission denied Philadelphia Park's intervention May 27, 2010 (Intervention Order).
- The Commission later issued a Final Merits Order Sept. 30, 2010 granting Harrah's Chester AWS, which Philadelphia Park appealed.
- Court held the Intervention Order was an abuse of discretion and vacated the related merits orders, remanding for a formal AAL hearing.
- Record shows the Commission did not hold a hearing on either petition and relied on written submissions.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the Harness Commission abused its discretion denying intervention | Philadelphia Park had a right/interest to intervene under GRAPP 35.28(a)(2) as an existing competitor | The Commission found Park's interest not sufficiently direct or necessary for intervention | Yes; abuse of discretion; reversal of Intervention Order |
| Whether Philadelphia Park satisfied GRAPP 35.28(a)(2) eligibility | Park has a directly affected, pecuniary and competitive interest | Park's interest was too remote or not adequately represented | Yes; Park qualifies under 35.28(a)(2) and intervention should be granted |
| Relation between intervention and standing to appeal | Standing to appeal under AAL Section 702 allows nonparties with direct interests to challenge adjudications | Intervention eligibility does not automatically grant standing to appeal | Intervention allowed; standing to appeal appropriately addressed in subsequent steps |
| Impact of remedy and remand | Remand for formal hearing aligns with fair process; prevents premature final determinations | Remand may delay resolution and preserve potential competitive harm | Remand appropriate; vacate Merits Orders and return for formal AAL proceedings |
Key Cases Cited
- MEC Pennsylvania Racing, Inc. v. Pennsylvania State Horse Racing Comm'n, 827 A.2d 580 (Pa.Cmwlth. 2003) (intervenor standing and hear/record considerations in licensing)
- Sheetz, Inc. v. Malt Beverages Distrib. Ass'n (Sheetz I), 881 A.2d 37 (Pa.Cmwlth. 2005) (intervention and standing in LCB proceedings; competitive injury)
- Capital BlueCross v. Pennsylvania Insurance Dep't, 937 A.2d 552 (Pa.Cmwlth. 2007) (competitor standing; record must show harm to interests)
- Citizens Against Gambling Subsidies, Inc. v. Pennsylvania Gaming Control Bd., 591 Pa. 312, 916 A.2d 624 (Pa. 2007) (difference between standing to appeal (702) and intervention)
- Society Hill Civic Ass'n v. Pa. Gaming Control Bd., 593 Pa. 1, 928 A.2d 175 (Pa. 2007) (direct interest standard in administrative appeals)
- Keystone Redevelopment Partners, LLC v. Gaming Control Bd., 5 A.3d 448 (Pa.Cmwlth. 2010) (intervention discretion and participation considerations)
- Cashdollar v. State Horse Racing Comm'n, 143 Pa.Cmwlth. 650, 600 A.2d 646 (Pa.Cmwlth. 1991) (community interest as basis for standing)