J.M. Cicchiello v. SEIU 1199P Union Service Employees International Union
361 M.D. 2015
| Pa. Commw. Ct. | Nov 18, 2016Background
- Petitioner Joan M. Cicchiello, a former registered nurse at SCI‑Frackville, was discharged in 2007; SEIU filed a grievance and the parties executed a December 2012 settlement that purported to award her whatever time was needed to attain 25 years of Commonwealth service to secure retiree health benefits.
- Department of Corrections (Department) counsel informed SEIU in Feb 2013 that the 25‑year provision conflicted with the State Employees’ Retirement Code and offered a February 2015 settlement to give Cicchiello one day of rehire plus one year of service so she could reach 15 years (the actual threshold for health insurance); SEIU and the Department executed the 2015 agreement but Cicchiello refused to sign.
- Cicchiello filed multiple suits: before this Court (original jurisdiction), in Pennsylvania common pleas, and in the federal Middle District, all alleging refusal to honor the December 2012 settlement and asserting breach of contract, fair‑representation/labor claims, and Section 1983 claims. Many of these actions had been dismissed previously.
- This Court previously dismissed Cicchiello’s claims against Commonwealth respondents (Cicchiello II). SEIU, Patterson, and Tellado filed preliminary objections (POs) asserting lack of jurisdiction over non‑Commonwealth respondents now that Commonwealth parties were dismissed.
- The Court found (1) ancillary jurisdiction over related non‑Commonwealth claims ends when claims against the Commonwealth are dismissed, and (2) judicial economy counseled against transferring the case to common pleas because Cicchiello is a serial litigant whose similar claims have been repeatedly rejected. The Court dismissed the Second Amended Complaint with prejudice as to SEIU/Patterson/Tellado and denied Cicchiello’s pending motions against them.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether this Court retains jurisdiction over SEIU and individual union officers after dismissal of Commonwealth parties | Cicchiello contends Court retains jurisdiction because the union represents Commonwealth employees and claims are related | Respondents argue Court only has ancillary jurisdiction over related non‑Commonwealth claims and that ancillarity ends once Commonwealth respondents were dismissed | Court sustained PO and held no jurisdiction over Respondents; dismissed complaint with prejudice against them |
| Whether respondents waived jurisdictional defects by filing appearances / motions | Cicchiello implied waiver by Respondents’ participation and submission of exhibits | Respondents argued a written appearance does not waive defective service/subject‑matter objections and they filed POs per Court order | Court agreed with Respondents; no waiver. Appearance alone does not waive jurisdictional objections |
| Whether the case should be transferred to common pleas instead of dismissed for lack of jurisdiction | Cicchiello sought relief and had pending or prior state actions where relief might be available | Respondents urged dismissal here; transfer would duplicate prior unsuccessful suits and burden courts | Court declined to transfer for judicial economy given serial, previously rejected litigation; dismissed with prejudice |
| Whether remaining POs and motions should be reached on merits | Cicchiello opposed and asserted various substantive claims (breach, duty of fair representation, §1983) | Respondents filed multiple substantive POs to each count | Because Court lacked jurisdiction over Respondents, it did not address other POs on the merits and denied the outstanding motions as to Respondents |
Key Cases Cited
- Meggett v. Pa. Dep’t of Corr., 856 A.2d 277 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2004) (standard for considering preliminary objections and accepting well‑pleaded facts and reasonable inferences)
- Werner v. Zazyczny, 681 A.2d 1331 (Pa. 1996) (preliminary objections sustained only when facts show legal insufficiency beyond doubt)
- Bowers v. T‑Netix, 837 A.2d 608 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2003) (ancillary jurisdiction over related non‑Commonwealth claims ends when Commonwealth claims are dismissed)
- Pittsburgh Fire Fighters, Local No. 1 ex rel. King v. Yablonsky, 867 A.2d 666 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2005) (same principle on ancillary jurisdiction)
- Smock v. Com., 436 A.2d 615 (Pa. 1981) (court may refuse transfer in the interest of judicial economy when transferee could not grant requested relief)
- Fleehr v. Mummert, 857 A.2d 683 (Pa. Super. 2004) (written appearance alone does not waive defective‑service objections)
- Case v. Hazleton Area Educ. Support Personnel Ass’n (PSEA/NEA), 928 A.2d 1154 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2007) (actions alleging breach of fair‑representation do not fall within this Court’s original jurisdiction)