Szablowski v. State Civil Service Commission, 111 A.3d 256

Background

Deanna Szablowski was an assistant manager (Liquor Store Clerk 2) at PA Liquor Control Board Store #0608; she had supervised cashiers and previously reported a manager (Mull) for theft, leading to his dismissal.
Between Sept. 2009 and Jan. 2011, the Board audited Store 0608 and charged Szablowski with manipulating post-void transactions (102 flagged) and failing to retain supporting documentation for 51 post-voids; she was suspended without pay and later discharged after a fact-finding.
The Civil Service Commission rejected the missing-documentation charge (finding records were handled by others) but found that 30 post-voids were problematic because Szablowski wrote reasons like “card declined” that were not corroborated in the register’s electronic journal; the Commission treated 27 of those as violations of Board policy.
On initial appeal (Szablowski I), the Commonwealth Court vacated and remanded for specific findings about whether each written reason required electronic corroboration and whether inventory losses could be tied to particular voids.
On remand the Commission again upheld termination based on its conclusion that certain general notations (e.g., “card declined”) implied a bank/card issuer decline requiring an electronic swipe record; the Commission found Szablowski credible but nonetheless concluded some entries were inaccurate.
The Commonwealth Court (this opinion) reversed, holding the Board’s evidence at best created suspicion, not proof of a policy violation or just cause for removal, and remanded for backpay calculation.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether there was just cause to terminate for inaccurate post-void reasons	Szablowski: her written reasons (e.g., “card declined”) meant visual rejection of an invalid card; policy only required recording a reason, not specific phrasing or electronic corroboration	Board: phrases like “credit declined” mean the issuer declined after a swipe; lack of electronic journal corroboration shows falsity/manipulation	Court: Reversed — Board failed to prove policy required swipes or particular wording; evidence gave suspicion only, not proof of violation or just cause
Whether missing inventory could be correlated to Szablowski’s post-voids	Szablowski: inventory evidence is speculative and cannot be tied to specific voids or dates	Board: inventory shortfalls correlated to many of Szablowski’s voids, supporting suspicion of theft	Court: Commission already rejected correlation on remand; inventory evidence insufficient and not before the Court
Whether pre-suspension procedure (Loudermill) was violated	Szablowski: suspension without pre-termination hearing violated due process	Board: (implicit) suspension was permissible pending investigation	Court: Did not decide because remedy (reinstatement and backpay) mooted additional relief; issue not resolved here
Whether Commission should have modified discipline after rejecting inventory correlation	Szablowski: Commission abused discretion by upholding removal based solely on 27 post-voids after discarding inventory link	Board: removal justified by post-void inaccuracies	Court: Agreed with Szablowski — Commission’s reliance on unproven inference was not substantial evidence; discipline unsupported

Key Cases Cited

Szablowski v. State Civil Service Commission (Pennsylvania Liquor Board), 76 A.3d 590 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2013) (remand for specific factual findings)
Perry v. State Civil Service Commission (Department of Labor and Industry), 38 A.3d 942 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2011) (just cause standard and agency discretion)
Wei v. State Civil Service Commission (Department of Health), 961 A.2d 254 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2008) (just cause must be merit-related)
Galant v. Department of Environmental Resources, 626 A.2d 496 (Pa. 1993) (definition of merit-related standard)
Cleveland Bd. of Educ. v. Loudermill, 470 U.S. 532 (U.S. 1985) (pretermination due process requirement for public employees)