IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA
MIDDLE DISTRICT

IN RE: J.V.R.; H.T., A MINOR THROUGH : No. 81 MM 2008
HER MOTHER, L.T.; ON BEHALF OF
:
THEMSELVES AND SIMILARLY
:
SITUATED YOUTH
:

ORDER

PER CURIAM
AND NOW, this 26th day of March, 2009, this Order acknowledges the Court’s
receipt of the Special Master’s First Interim Report and Recommendations, which was
prepared in pursuit of this Court’s directive to investigate "the alleged travesty of juvenile
justice in Luzerne County … [and] to identify the affected juveniles and rectify the situation
as fairly and swiftly as possible." 81 MM 2008, order dated 2/11/2009. A copy of the First
Interim Report and Recommendations is attached to this Order.
The Special Master’s First Interim Report proposes procedures to identify in an
expeditious fashion a certain class of Luzerne County juvenile cases where the Master
believes that summary relief should be afforded in the form of vacating the underlying
adjudications or consent decrees, and ordering expungement of the records of such
consent decrees or adjudications. The Special Master requests authorization to grant such
relief. This Court hereby specifically authorizes the Special Master to grant such relief as
expeditiously as possible. Furthermore, we ADOPT AND APPROVE the entirety of the
Special Master’s First Interim Report and Recommendations, subject only to the following
two qualifications.
(1) The Special Master has noted that some of the affected juveniles or their
counsel may wish to delay expungement until they can collect records and information for

use in pending civil lawsuits. This Court’s primary concern remains with identifying and
correcting miscarriages of justice in the underlying criminal consent decrees and
adjudications as quickly as possible. Accordingly, once appropriate cases are identified
according to the criteria the Special Master has set forth, orders of vacatur and
expungement shall be entered promptly. This directive in no way shall affect the discretion
of the Special Master to provide reasonable advance notice to affected juveniles, and to
entertain specific, supported requests to delay the effect of the expungement aspect of
such orders.
(2) In order to promptly identify the affected juveniles, the Special Master requests
that this Court authorize the Luzerne County Probation Office to release copies of the
Luzerne County Juvenile Court daily case lists from January 1, 2003 to May 31, 2008
(“daily lists”) to the District Attorney of Luzerne County and an attorney for the Juvenile Law
Center (“JLC”). Since this Court’s prior order of February 11, 2009, appointing the Special
Master, we are aware that the JLC has filed a federal civil law suit seeking monetary
damages and attorneys’ fees arising from the underlying Juvenile Court adjudications and
consent decrees. Notwithstanding the JLC’s adversarial role, this Court recognizes that the
JLC has been of assistance to the Special Master in addressing the situation in Luzerne
County and remains fairly positioned to represent the interests of those juveniles with
whom it has specific representation agreements in the proceedings below. However, the
Special Master’s authorized task is singular: to identify every affected juvenile for purposes
of recommending immediate appropriate relief from his or her criminal consent decree and
adjudication. Accordingly, the Court directs that the release of these lists is for the sole
purpose of identifying those juveniles - whether they are presently represented or not - who
fit the criteria for the accelerated disposition proposed by the Special Master, and not for
purposes of collateral litigation. The release shall be subject to the security provisions
identified by the Special Master, with discretion remaining in the Special Master to modify

or expand those procedures as implementation of this amendment and subsequent events
may require.
This Order specifically recognizes that the Special Master’s First Interim Report and
Recommendations concerns itself only with one class of cases of the many subject to
review. See Report and Recommendations at 8, ¶ B(1). Recommendations as to other
cases are to follow in due course.
Jurisdiction is retained.