Capizzi v. PennDOT, Bureau of Driver Licensing
141 A.3d 635
| Pa. Commw. Ct. | 2016Background
- Capizzi was convicted on January 26, 2007 of a Drug Act offense (35 P.S. § 780-113(a)(12)).
- Beaver County Clerk of Courts did not certify/transmit the conviction to the PA Department of Transportation (DOT) until November 14, 2014; DOT mailed suspension notice November 24, 2014, effective December 29, 2014.
- DOT imposed a mandatory six-month suspension under 75 Pa.C.S. § 1532(c)(1)(i); Capizzi appealed to Allegheny County Common Pleas on December 3, 2014.
- At hearing Capizzi conceded the conviction but testified he had completed his criminal sentence (2009), obtained steady employment in 2009 that requires driving, and reasonably believed no suspension would occur after no timely notice.
- DOT conceded it acted promptly once it received the report; both DOT and common pleas acknowledged Capizzi demonstrated prejudice from the nearly eight-year reporting delay.
- The trial court vacated the suspension as an unfair result of an extraordinary delay attributable to the clerk; this Court affirmed, applying the limited exception articulated in Gingrich.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Capizzi) | Defendant's Argument (DOT) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether an extraordinary delay in reporting a conviction by a clerk can justify vacating a mandatory suspension | The nearly eight-year delay caused prejudice (lost expectations, new job requiring driving) and the suspension has become punitive rather than protective; relief is appropriate | DOT argued only delays attributable to DOT permit vacatur; delays by clerks are outside DOT control and do not bar suspension | Court held limited exception applies: where delay is extraordinarily long, licensee has a clean subsequent record and shows prejudice, vacatur may be appropriate; affirmed vacatur here |
| Whether DOT timely acted once it received the certified conviction | Capizzi argued DOT acted promptly but overall delay still prejudicial | DOT conceded it acted promptly upon receipt and cannot be blamed for clerk delay | Court found DOT acted timely; decision to vacate based on extraordinary nature of clerk delay and resulting prejudice, not DOT inaction |
| Whether the ordinary rule (only DOT-attributable delays actionable) remains intact | Capizzi urged application of Gingrich exception to preserve fairness | DOT urged continuation of prior precedent holding clerks' delays never justify relief | Court reiterated general rule remains, but affirmed narrow Gingrich exception where all three factors (extraordinary delay, long clean record, prejudice) are met |
Key Cases Cited
- Dep’t of Transp., Bureau of Driver Licensing v. Gingrich, 134 A.3d 528 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2016) (recognizes limited exception where extraordinary reporting delay, subsequent clean record, and prejudice make suspension punitive rather than protective)
- Dep’t of Transp., Bureau of Driver Licensing v. Gombocz, 909 A.2d 798 (Pa. 2006) (established two-part burden for challenging delayed suspensions and general rule that only DOT-attributable delays justify relief)
- Grover v. Dep’t of Transp., Bureau of Driver Licensing, 734 A.2d 941 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1999) (places burden on DOT to prove when it received conviction report)
- Terraciano v. Dep’t of Transp., Bureau of Driver Licensing, 753 A.2d 233 (Pa. 2000) (reaffirms that delays not chargeable to DOT generally do not warrant vacatur)