[J-71-2019] [MO: Dougherty, J.]

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA MIDDLE DISTRICT

SARA LADD, SAMANTHA HARRIS, AND : No. 33 MAP 2018 POCONO MOUNTAIN VACATION : PROPERTIES, LLC, : Appeal from the Order of the : Commonwealth Court at No. 321 Appellants : MD 2017 dated June 4, 2018 : sustaining in part and overruling in : part the preliminary objections and v. : dismissing with prejudice the : Petition for Review. : REAL ESTATE COMMISSION OF THE : ARGUED: September 11, 2019 COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA : AND DEPARTMENT OF STATE (BUREAU : OF PROFESSIONAL AND : OCCUPATIONAL AFFAIRS) OF THE : COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, : : Appellees :

DISSENTING OPINION

JUSTICE MUNDY DECIDED: May 19, 2020 Appellant Sara Ladd contends that the licensing requirements enacted by the legislature through the Real Estate Licensing and Registration Act (RELRA)1 are unconstitutional because she wishes only to practice real estate in a limited fashion. I cannot agree with the Majority that, because Ladd operates a smaller-scale business, she has raised a colorable claim that the RELRA’s requirements are so unreasonably oppressive as to violate the Pennsylvania Constitution. As noted by the Commonwealth Court in its decision in this matter, “[p]rerequisites to practicing a certain profession, such as a professional license, can be seen across many career fields. We would no sooner 63 P.S. §§ 4455.101-455.902. obviate the licensure requirement for an attorney, physical therapist, or any other professional, merely because they have limited clients or only practice part of the year.”

Ladd v. Real Estate Comm’n of Commonwealth, 187 A.3d 1070, 1078 (Pa. Cmwlth.

2018). As I find the Commonwealth Court’s decision, authored by the Honorable P. Kevin Brobson, correctly concluded the RELRA’s requirements are constitutional, I would affirm its decision in this case. Accordingly, I respectfully dissent.

[J-71-2019] [MO: Dougherty, J.] - 2