Case Involving Abstract of Driver Record History of Licence Suspension
In Walck v. Department of Transportation, Bureau of Driver Licensing, 155 Pa. Commw. 1, 625 A.2d 1276 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1993), the licensee appealed from a court of common pleas order upholding the suspension of his operating privileges pursuant to the 1990 version of Section 1572 of the Motor Vehicle Code.
Walck had applied for a Pennsylvania commercial driver's license and was notified on January 22, 1992, that his right to apply for a driver's license was being denied because Department of Transportation (DOT) had obtained information from New Jersey that his driving privileges were suspended in that state.
Walck was directed to return any current driver's license and was advised that the cancellation would be effective March 4, 1992.
Walck's application for a commercial driver's license had triggered a search of the National Driving Register, which revealed that Walck's driving privilege was suspended in New Jersey as a result of a 1986 conviction for driving under the influence (DUI).
DOT asserted that had it been aware of the suspension of Walck's New Jersey driver's license since 1986, it would not have renewed his standard Pennsylvania driver's license.
In Walck, the Court upheld the application of the then-current 1990 version of Section 1572 of the Motor Vehicle Code to the cancellation of Walck's Pennsylvania driver's license resulting from the suspension related to the 1986 conviction.
In rejecting Walck's numerous arguments that his license should not be cancelled, this Court wrote:
Because the abstract of driver record history dated March 18, 1992 showed Walck's New Jersey license to be on suspended status since 1986 for DUI, DOT has proven it acted properly in canceling his Pennsylvania license.
As the New Jersey abstract of driver history record reflects that Walck's license was still under suspension or, at the very least, not yet restored as of March 18, 1992.