Spaid Appeal
Spaid Appeal
Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
On September 26, 1955, an action of mandamus was instituted to compel the proper school officials of the Warwick Union School District to issue a general employment certificate to Evelyn Mae Mellinger. Preliminary objections were filed, and the parties subsequently agreed upon a statement of facts in the nature of a case stated. After oral argument, the court below directed the issuance of the certificate. This appeal followed.
The question involved may be thus stated: In the case of a child who has attained the age of sixteen years and has met all of the statutory requirements, does a local school district have discretion in the issuance of a general employment certificate, or is the issuance of such certificate mandatory.
According to the stipulation, Evelyn Mae Mellinger was born August 22, 1939, and is presently between
The Public School Code sets forth, Act of March 10, 1949, P. L. 30, section 1326, 24 PS §13-1326, that school attendance is compulsory until the age of seventeen years unless the child holds a certificate of graduation from a regularly accredited senior high school. However, section 1330 of the Code (24 PS §13-1330) provides that the compulsory attendance requirement shall not apply to any child who '“(l) Has attained the age of sixteen (16) years, and who is regularly engaged in any useful and lawful employment or service during the time the public schools are in session, and who holds an employment certificate issued' according to law;"(2) Has been . . . found to.be unable to profit from further 'pifídic school'attendance,-and who has
The issuance of employment certificates is regulated by the Act of May 13, 1915, P. L. 286, 43 PS 41 et seq. The pertinent provisions are sections 8 to 18 (43 PS 49-60). Briefly summarized, the statute requires employers of children under eighteen to procure and keep on file an employment certificate which “shall” be issued only by certain school officials, and application for which must be made by the parent, guardian or legal custodian of the child. Employment certificates are of two classes, general and vacation. A general employment certificate entitles a child sixteen to eighteen years of age to work during the entire year. The official authorized “shall not” issue the certificate until he has received, examined, approved and filed certain enumerated papers, all of which have been duly presented in the case at bar. The employer must ac
Our consideration of the two statutes in question, and they are in pari materia,
Turning to the Act of 1915, the language used negatives any intention to permit discretionary interpretation by local school officials. The word “shall” is used throughout the statute, and it is generally to be regarded as imperative. See Kuzmen v. Kamien, 139 Pa. Superior Ct. 538, 12 A. 2d 471. Specifically, it is apparent that the several sections above summarized use the word “shall” in the mandatory sense. The conditions under Which employment certificates are to be issued are carefully prescribed, and when these condi
Our conclusion is that the Legislature did not intend to give local school districts discretionary power to withhold a general employment certificate in the case of a sixteen year old child who has met the statutory requirements. To hold otherwise would destroy the uniformity throughout the Commonwealth which we believe the Legislature intended. We agree with the court below “that the directors of the Warwick Union School District were acting beyond the scope of their authority when they enunciated a work permit policy applying to children over sixteen years of age”.
Judgment affirmed.
See Section 62 of the Statutory Construction Act of May 28, 1937, P. L. 1019, 46 PS 562.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.