Case law

Klesic, S. v. USTI Board

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 4, 2015

: Petitioners : Petition for Allowance of Appeal from the : Order of the Superior Court : v … : : : UNDERGROUND STORAGE TANK : INDEMNIFICATION BOARD; ICF : INTERNATIONAL, INC.;

Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Brown

656 A.2d 1326 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 10, 1995

Brown is disbarred from the Bar of this Commonwealth, retroactive to June 18, 1993, and she shall comply with all the provisions of Rule 217, Pa.R.D.E. … It is further ORDERED that respondent shall pay costs to the Disciplinary Board pursuant to Rule 208(g), Pa.R.D.E. MONTEMURO, J., is sitting by designation.

Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Brown

656 A.2d 1326 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 10, 1995

CAPPY, J., dissents and would accept the recommendation of the Disciplinary Board for a five-year suspension, retroactive to June 18, 1993.

Brown, A, Pet v. OOR (Treasury Dept)

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · May 25, 2016

BROWN, : No. 40 WM 2016 : Petitioner : : … : No. 40 WM 2016 : Petitioner : : : v

Brown, for Use v. Castle Shannon Boro.

318 Pa. 363 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 28, 1935

There is nothing in the point, but it suffices to say that as it was not made in the court below it cannot be made on appeal here (Kohn v. Burke, 294 Pa. 282 ; Kolich v. Monongahela Ry. Co., 303 Pa. 463 ; Bassett v. … The question of the admissibility of evidence from such a witness, is, to a considerable extent, within the discre *368 tion of the trial judge: Bohan v. Avoca Boro., 154 Pa. 404 ; Beck v. Phila.

Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Brown

534 Pa. 231 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Jun 18, 1993

Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Brown

540 Pa. 219 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 10, 1995

Brown is disbarred from the Bar of this Commonwealth, retroactive to June 18, 1993, and she shall comply with all the provisions of Rule 217, Pa.R.D.E. … CAPPY, J., dissents and would accept the recommendation of the Disciplinary Board for a five-year suspension, retroactive to June 18, 1993.

Frantz ex rel. Garberich v. Brown

1 Pen. & W. 257 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · May 15, 1830

Evidence of the agreement between Frantz and Brown,' at the time of executing their bonds to Brechthill, was excluded against the bent of the judge’s inclination, on the authority of Davis v. … In Davis v.

Brown, III, S. v. Comm of PA

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · May 9, 2016

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA MIDDLE DISTRICT SAMUEL BROWN III, NATURAL : No. 66 MAL 2016 PERSON, AND AS JOINT TENANT : TRUSTEE WITH THE RIGHT OF … from : the Order of the Commonwealth Court Petitioner : : : v

Commonwealth Ins. & Trust Co. v. Brown

166 Pa. 477 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 4, 1895

Brown, A., Pet v. Green Co CCP

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Sep 16, 2015

BROWN), : : Petitioner : : : v.

Buckley v. Brown Hoisting Machinery Co.

248 Pa. 63 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Jan 18, 1915

Gould v. Zoning Hearing Board

616 Pa. 366 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Jul 9, 2012

Payes v. Workers' Compensation Appeal Board

621 Pa. 564 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 30, 2013

Workmen’s Compensation Appeal Board (Blecker), 546 Pa. 83 , 683 A.2d 262 (1996), Ryan v. … See Daneker v. Workers' Compensation Appeal Board (White Haven Center), 757 A.2d 429, 433 (Pa.Cmwlth.2000); Donovan v.

Frazier v. Workers' Compensation Appeal Board

616 Pa. 592 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Sep 28, 2012

The panel noted that it had recently decided Fox v. … Dean v.

Farrell v. Board of Trustees

440 Pa. 255 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 9, 1970

Spica v. International Ladies Garment Workers’ Union, 388 Pa. 382 , 130 A. 2d 468 (1957) ; Restatement, Conflict of Laws, §75. It is clear that Pa. R. C. … See Quinn v. Pershing, 367 Pa. 426 , 80 A 2d 712 (1951).

United Security Life Insurance v. Brown

270 Pa. 269 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Apr 18, 1921

Dreese v. Brown

290 Pa. 63 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · May 10, 1927

with a judgment entered on a verdict in his favor simply because the actual happening of the accident was seen and described only by plaintiff on one side and defendant on the other; for, as said by us in Braunschweiger v.

Stilman v. Tax Review Board

402 Pa. 492 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Jan 4, 1961

As recently as Commonwealth v. … See Pittsburgh v.

Feldman v. Board of Supervisors

620 Pa. 591 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Jun 28, 2013