Curley v. Moore Smeal, 41 A.3d 916

Curley pled nolo contendere to second‑degree murder in 2002 and was sentenced to life; sentencing order did not state he owed costs, but he agreed to pay all costs in the plea colloquy.
Certificates of costs identified $16,045.73 in court costs and fees; the Department began deducting funds from Curley’s inmate account in 2002 under 42 Pa.C.S. § 9728(b)(5).
Curley filed a 2004 petition to suspend or vacate fines, costs and restitution, which the trial court dismissed; deductions continued until 2009.
From 2002 to 2009, the Department deducted 20% of Curley’s inmate funds, totaling $5,140.64, to satisfy the costs.
Curley, after administrative remedies failed, filed an amended petition for review in 2011 in the Commonwealth Court alleging unlawful deductions absent a sentencing court order.
Both the Department and the Clerk of Courts asserted defenses of statute of limitations, equitable estoppel, and laches; the court granted judgment on the pleadings for the respondents.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Curley’s action is time-barred by the statute of limitations.	Curley argues nonreceipt of a sentencing order tolls the claim.	Six‑month mandamus limitations since injury in 2002; Curley knew or should have known earlier.	Time-barred; six‑month period runs from injury in 2002.

Gleason v. Borough of Moosic, 609 Pa. 353 (Pa. 2011) (mandamus limitations start when cause accrues; discovery does not toll)
E.D.B. v. Clair, 987 A.2d 681 (Pa. 2009) (lack of knowledge does not toll mandamus limitations)
Casner v. American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, 658 A.2d 865 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1995) (continuing violation doctrine rejected for limitation purposes)