Ettelman v. Commonwealth, Department of Transportation, Bureau of Driver Licensing
92 A.3d 1259
Pa. Commw. Ct.2014Background
- PennDOT suspended Ettelman's operating privilege for one year for refusing chemical testing after DUI arrest.
- Arrest occurred January 12, 2013; police detected odor of alcohol and administered field sobriety tests, which Ettelman failed.
- At Brandywine Hospital Ettelman allegedly refused to submit to chemical testing after implied consent warning.
- Trial court denied Ettelman's appeal on April 11, 2013; suspension notice issued February 1, 2013, effective March 8, 2013.
- Ettelman later submitted aJuly 17, 2013 video purporting to show taillights were on; trial court considered it via writ of audita querela.
- Trial court granted the writ of audita querela and rescinded the suspension, relying on the after-discovered video to impeach credibility.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Authority to reopen judgment via audita querela | Ettelman argues the trial court could reopen for after-discovered evidence. | PennDOT contends jurisdiction was lost and no proper motion was filed. | Court reversed; writ not properly available and evidence not after-discovered. |
| Jurisdiction to reconvene after final order | Reopening was permitted due to new evidence. | Jurisdiction to modify final order expired within 30 days; writ invalid. | Trial court lacked authority to reconvene; reversal affirmed. |
| Whether after-discovered evidence warrants reversal in a license-suspension case | Video could alter credibility and result. | Video was not after-discovered; could have been obtained earlier with due diligence. | Not sufficient to justify opening judgment; evidence not after-discovered. |
Key Cases Cited
- City of Philadelphia Police Department v. Civil Service Commission, 702 A.2d 878 (Pa.Cmwlth.1997) (finality and limits on post-judgment relief)
- Department of Transportation, Bureau of Motor Vehicles v. Kosak, 639 A.2d 1252 (Pa.Cmwlth.1994) (finality of judgments and time-limited modifications)
- German Trust Company of Davenport, Iowa v. Plotke, 118 A.508 (Pa.1922) (audita querela as an available, limited post-judgment remedy)
- A.G. Cullen Construction, Inc. v. State System of Higher Education, 1167 A.2d 527 (Pa.Cmwlth.2006) (standards for re-opening judgment on after-discovered evidence)
- In re Cook, 527 A.2d 1115 (Pa.Cmwlth.1987) (requires new, non-cumulative, and likely to change outcome evidence)
- Lanthier v. Department of Transportation, Bureau of Driver Licensing, 22 A.3d 346 (Pa.Cmwlth.2011) (standard for reviewing suspension decisions and substantial evidence)