§ 1550. Judicial review.
(a) General rule.--Any person who has been denied a driver's license, whose driver's license has been
canceled, whose commercial driver's license designation has been removed or whose
operating privilege has been recalled, suspended, revoked or disqualified by the department
shall have the right to appeal to the court vested with jurisdiction of such appeals
by or pursuant to Title 42 (relating to judiciary and judicial procedure). The appellant
shall serve a copy of the petition for appeal, together with a copy of the notice
of the action from which the appeal has been taken, upon the department's legal office.
(b) Supersedeas.--
(1) (i) Except as provided in subparagraphs (ii) and (iii), filing and service of a petition
for appeal from a suspension or revocation shall operate as a supersedeas until final
determination of the matter by the court vested with the jurisdiction of such appeals.
(ii) The filing and service of a petition for appeal from denial, recall, suspension or
cancellation of a driver's license or from removal of the commercial driver's license
designation under section 1503 (relating to persons ineligible for licensing; license
issuance to minors; junior driver's license), 1504 (relating to classes of licenses),
1509 (relating to qualifications for school bus driver endorsement), 1514 (relating
to expiration and renewal of drivers' licenses), 1519 (relating to determination of
incompetency), 1572 (relating to cancellation of driver's license) or 1609.3 (relating
to noncompliance with certification requirements) shall not act as a supersedeas unless
ordered by the court after a hearing attended by the petitioner.
(iii) Further review by another court shall not operate as a supersedeas unless a court
of competent jurisdiction determines otherwise.
(2) In the case of a disqualification of the commercial operating privilege, the driver
may petition to the court of common pleas of his county of residence, which court
may grant a supersedeas ex parte upon a showing of reasonable likelihood of successful
prosecution of the appeal.
(c) Proceedings of court.--The court shall set the matter for hearing upon 60 days' written notice to the department
and determine whether:
(1) the petitioner's driver's license should be denied or canceled;
(2) the petitioner's operating privilege should be suspended, revoked or recalled; or
(3) the petitioner's endorsement or commercial driver's license designation should be
removed.
(d) Documentation.--
(1) In any proceeding under this section, documents received by the department from the
courts or administrative bodies of other states or the Federal Government shall be
admissible into evidence to support the department's case. In addition, the department
may treat the received documents as documents of the department and use any of the
methods of storage permitted under the provisions of 42 Pa.C.S. § 6109 (relating to
photographic copies of business and public records) and may reproduce such documents
in accordance with the provisions of 42 Pa.C.S. § 6103 (relating to proof of official
records). In addition, if the department receives information from courts or administrative
bodies of other states or the Federal Government by means of electronic transmission,
it may certify that it has received the information by means of electronic transmission
and that certification shall be prima facie proof of the adjudication and facts contained
in such an electronic transmission.
(2) In any proceeding under this section, documents received by the department from any
other court or from an insurance company shall be admissible into evidence to support
the department's case. In addition, if the department receives information from a
court by means of electronic transmission or from an insurance company which is complying
with its obligation under Subchapter H of Chapter 17 (relating to proof of financial
responsibility) by means of electronic transmission, it may certify that it has received
the information by means of electronic transmission, and that certification shall
be prima facie proof of the adjudication and facts contained in such an electronic
transmission.
(Apr. 28, 1978, P.L.202, No.53, eff. 60 days; May 30, 1990, P.L.173, No.42, eff. Nov.
1, 1990; June 28, 1993, P.L.137, No.33, eff. July 1, 1993; July 2, 1993, P.L.408,
No.58, eff. 60 days; Feb. 10, 1994, P.L.20, No.3, eff. 60 days; Oct. 7, 1996, P.L.688,
No.118, eff. 60 days; June 25, 1999, P.L.164, No.23, eff. 180 days; Jan. 27, 2012,
P.L.1, No.1, eff. imd.; Nov. 25, 2013, P.L.974, No.89, eff. imd.)
2013 Amendment. Act 89 reenacted subsec. (d)(2). See the preamble to Act 89 in the appendix to this
title for special provisions relating to legislative findings and declarations.
2012 Amendment. Act 1 amended subsecs. (a), (b)(1)(ii) and (c).
1996 Amendment. Act 118 amended subsecs. (a), (b) and (c).
1994 Amendment. Act 3 added subsec. (d). The amendment by Act 3 is identical to the amendments by
Acts 33 and 58 of 1993 and therefore the text has been merged. See section 8 of Act
3 in the appendix to this title for special provisions relating to savings provision.
1993 Amendment. See section 12 of Act 58 in the appendix to this title for special provisions relating
to savings provision.
Cross References. Section 1550 is referred to in sections 102, 1519, 1551, 1553, 1554, 1556, 1786, 3753
of this title; section 4355 of Title 23 (Domestic Relations); section 933 of Title
42 (Judiciary and Judicial Procedure).
Notes of Decisions
Gallant v. Commonwealth, Dep't of Transp., 805 A.2d 1 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2002).
· cites it 38× “The amendment to Section 1550 provides: In any proceeding under this section, documents received by the department from the courts or administrative bodies of other states or the Federal Government shall be admissible into evidence to support the department's case.”
Probst v. Com., Dept. of Transp., 849 A.2d 1135 (Pa. 2004).
· cites it 7× “PennDOT filed a Motion to Quash Appeal, alleging that the court of common pleas did not have jurisdiction because the action PennDOT took—requiring Appellee to equip his vehicles with an ignition interlock system before his operating privileges are restored—is not one of the…”
Gingrich v. Commonwealth, Dep't of Transp., Bureau of Driver Licensing, 134 A.3d 528 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2016).
· cites it 2× “- It is equally well established that the remedy for one aggrieved by a suspension of her operating privilege is an appeal to common pleas as provided at 75 Pa.C.S. § 1550(a). Turning to the instant matter, Gingrich availed herself of her statutory remedy.”
Duffey v. Dept. of Transp., 607 A.2d 815 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 1992).
· cites it 6× “Section 1550 of the Vehicle Code, 75 Pa.C.S. § 1550, provides that any person whose license has been suspended by DOT shall have a right of appeal to the court vested with jurisdiction of such appeals by the Judicial Code.”
McNeilis v. Commonwealth, 546 A.2d 1339 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 1988).
· cites it 6× “Because 75 Pa. C. S. §1550 does not specify how statutory appeals of this sort are to be perfected, difficulties on this same point have arisen in various other cases.”
Commonwealth v. Wolf, 632 A.2d 864 (Pa. 1993).
· cites it 4× “Furthermore, the Legislature has specifically addressed the discretion of the trial court to grant a supersedeas of a suspension order through 75 Pa.C.S. § 1550. Pursuant to Section 1550, review of a mandatory suspension by a trial court is limited to a determination of whether…”
Com., Dept. of Transp. v. McCafferty, 758 A.2d 1155 (Pa. 2000).
· cites it 2× “§ 6501 (certified records of conviction from any Federal or state court and certified records of administrative adjudication from any state admissible without further documentation); 75 Pa.C.S. § 1550(d) (documents that PennDOT certified were received by means of electronic…”
Turk v. Com., Dept. of Transp., 983 A.2d 805 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2009).
· cites it 14× “Licensee appealed under 75 Pa.C.S. § 1550 ("Judicial review") and requested a supersedeas.”
Harrington v. Commonwealth, 763 A.2d 386 (Pa. 2000).
· cites it 2× “Harrington filed a statutory appeal of this administrative action in the court of common pleas, see 75 Pa.C.S. § 1550(a), contending, inter alia, that the Bureau's notice of suspension was constitutionally deficient.”
— 75 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 1550(a) — 77 cases
Probst v. Com., Dept. of Transp., 849 A.2d 1135 (Pa. 2004).
“PennDOT filed a Motion to Quash Appeal, alleging that the court of common pleas did not have jurisdiction because the action PennDOT took—requiring Appellee to equip his vehicles with an ignition interlock system before his operating privileges are restored—is not one of the…”
Gingrich v. Commonwealth, Dep't of Transp., Bureau of Driver Licensing, 134 A.3d 528 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2016).
“- It is equally well established that the remedy for one aggrieved by a suspension of her operating privilege is an appeal to common pleas as provided at 75 Pa.C.S. § 1550(a). Turning to the instant matter, Gingrich availed herself of her statutory remedy.”
Harrington v. Commonwealth, 763 A.2d 386 (Pa. 2000).
“Harrington filed a statutory appeal of this administrative action in the court of common pleas, see 75 Pa.C.S. § 1550(a), contending, inter alia, that the Bureau's notice of suspension was constitutionally deficient.”
— 75 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 1550(b) — 12 cases
McNeilis v. Commonwealth, 546 A.2d 1339 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 1988).
“Because 75 Pa. C. S. §1550 does not specify how statutory appeals of this sort are to be perfected, difficulties on this same point have arisen in various other cases.”
— 75 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 1550(b)(1) — 4 cases
Commonwealth v. Wolf, 632 A.2d 864 (Pa. 1993).
“Furthermore, the Legislature has specifically addressed the discretion of the trial court to grant a supersedeas of a suspension order through 75 Pa.C.S. § 1550. Pursuant to Section 1550, review of a mandatory suspension by a trial court is limited to a determination of whether…”
— 75 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 1550(b)(1)(H) — 1 case
— 75 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 1550(b)(1)(f) — 1 case
— 75 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 1550(b)(1)(i) — 6 cases
— 75 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 1550(b)(1)(ii) — 1 case
Turk v. Com., Dept. of Transp., 983 A.2d 805 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2009).
“Licensee appealed under 75 Pa.C.S. § 1550 ("Judicial review") and requested a supersedeas.”
— 75 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 1550(b)(2) — 1 case
Commonwealth v. Wolf, 632 A.2d 864 (Pa. 1993).
“Furthermore, the Legislature has specifically addressed the discretion of the trial court to grant a supersedeas of a suspension order through 75 Pa.C.S. § 1550. Pursuant to Section 1550, review of a mandatory suspension by a trial court is limited to a determination of whether…”
— 75 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 1550(b)(l)(i) — 2 cases
— 75 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 1550(c) — 19 cases
Turk v. Com., Dept. of Transp., 983 A.2d 805 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2009).
“Licensee appealed under 75 Pa.C.S. § 1550 ("Judicial review") and requested a supersedeas.”
McNeilis v. Commonwealth, 546 A.2d 1339 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 1988).
“Because 75 Pa. C. S. §1550 does not specify how statutory appeals of this sort are to be perfected, difficulties on this same point have arisen in various other cases.”
— 75 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 1550(c)(1) — 1 case
— 75 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 1550(c)(2) — 1 case
— 75 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 1550(d) — 17 cases
Gallant v. Commonwealth, Dep't of Transp., 805 A.2d 1 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2002).
“The amendment to Section 1550 provides: In any proceeding under this section, documents received by the department from the courts or administrative bodies of other states or the Federal Government shall be admissible into evidence to support the department's case.”
Com., Dept. of Transp. v. McCafferty, 758 A.2d 1155 (Pa. 2000).
“§ 6501 (certified records of conviction from any Federal or state court and certified records of administrative adjudication from any state admissible without further documentation); 75 Pa.C.S. § 1550(d) (documents that PennDOT certified were received by means of electronic…”
— 75 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 1550(d)(1) — 7 cases
Gallant v. Commonwealth, Dep't of Transp., 805 A.2d 1 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2002).
“The amendment to Section 1550 provides: In any proceeding under this section, documents received by the department from the courts or administrative bodies of other states or the Federal Government shall be admissible into evidence to support the department's case.”
— 75 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 1550(d)(2) — 6 cases
— 75 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 1550(ib) — 1 case
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.