Case law

Thompson's Estate

282 Pa. 30 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Nov 25, 1924

(No. 1), 249 Pa. 469 ), but the general principles therein enunciated are here applied, and even more extensive power, in so far as purposes for which they may be established, is recognized. … We are of the opinion that the court had jurisdiction to appoint a qualified person to carry out the general intent of the testator, and that the language used does not sufficiently indicate that the trust should be effective

Commonwealth v. Mills

447 Pa. 163 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Dec 31, 1971

the majority of the Superior Court, namely, that this position fails to recognize the real foundation of successive prosecutions by the state and federal governments, i.e., dual sovereignty and that the Bartkus decision “clearly … The policies which underlie the prohibition are first, guilt should be established by proving the elements of a crime to the satisfaction *170 of a single jury, not by capitalizing oh the increased probability of conviction

Washington Arbitration Case

436 Pa. 168 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Nov 28, 1969

The statute authorizing this arbitration clearly provides that “the determination of the majority of the board of arbitration thus established shall be final on the issue or issues in dispute and shall be binding upon the … board or commission, independent administrative board or commission, office or other agency of a political *173 subdivision now in existence or hereafter created, empowered to determine or affect private rights, privileges, immunities

Erfer v. Commonwealth

568 Pa. 128 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 15, 2002

Clearly, a political committee does not have the right, in and of itself, to vote. … “A statute will only be declared unconstitutional if it clearly, *138 palpably and plainly violates the constitution.” Id. (citations omitted).

Johnson v. Commonwealth

115 Pa. 369 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 21, 1887

The verdict, based upon such .evidence, may therefore be regarded as conclusively establishing the corpus delicti. … If it should be sanctioned, what would prevent a person accused of having stolen property in his possession from successfully interposing a like plea of constitutional immunity and thus thwarting any attempt to search for

In re Determination of Priority of Commission among Certain Judges of the Superior Court & Commonwealth Court

493 Pa. 555 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 24, 1981

viz., whether appointive judicial service should be considered in determining which member of a court has priority of commission. ■ Nevertheless, this Court has interpreted the Constitution of 1874, article V, § 17, to clearly … primary election in 1969, the electors of the Commonwealth may elect to have the justices and judges of the Supreme, Superior, Commonwealth and all other statewide courts appointed by the Governor from a list of persons qualified

COMMONWEALTH OF PA., HIGHER ED. ASSISTANCE AGENCY v. Abington Mem. Hosp.

478 Pa. 514 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Apr 28, 1978

Nevertheless, the legislature left it to the PHEAA to determine which institutions would qualify for assistance *527 under the statutory definition. … The purposes of the Institutional Assistance Grants Act (IAGA) have been clearly stated by the Legislature.

Southco, Inc. v. Concord Township

552 Pa. 66 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · May 20, 1998

However, for purposes of zoning, the manner in which an establishment derives its income is not determinative of the establishment’s principal use. Philm Corp. v. Washington Township, 162 Pa. … This scarcity is attributable to the strict regulations placed on such establishments by the Act.

Commonwealth v. Stohr

361 Pa. Super. 293 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 6, 1987

To qualify a statement as an excited utterance the statement must be: ‘a spontaneous declaration by a person whose mind has been suddenly made subject to an overpowering emotion caused by some unexpected and shocking occurrence … Clearly the mother’s corroborative testimony was permitted to include “so much of the complaint as will identify the occurrence complained of with the crime charged.” Commonwealth v.

Francis v. Corleto

418 Pa. 417 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Jun 30, 1965

Plaintiffs establish neither a clear right to the funds sought nor a corresponding mandatory, ministerial duty on the part of defendants to pay those sums. … We conclude that neither the refund of plaintiffs’ pension fund payments nor the receipt of terminal vacation pay are rights enjoyed by plaintiffs which are immune from offset by a legitimate City claim.

Baum Estate

418 Pa. 404 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Jun 30, 1965

Although we recognize that what is or is not an "original" may vary according to the situation, it is apparent, nevertheless, that a carbon may qualify, in appropriate circumstances, as an "original". … We hold, therefore, that if the carbon sheets can be properly authenticated, then they will qualify as "originals" for the purpose of Section 7(1) of the Wills Act.

Burk v. Howley

179 Pa. 539 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Jan 4, 1897

If all the evidence is insufficient to establish probable cause the court shall so instruct the jury.” … Clearly, there are no facts in this case to which the principle announced in McCarthy v. DeArmit will apply.

Parker v. Philadelphia

391 Pa. 242 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Jan 8, 1958

below, and we will not further consider the merits of the case or pass upon the reasons for or against such action, unless it is plain that no such' grounds existed or that the rules of law relied on are palpably wrong or clearly … It is true that the mere possession of discretionary power by an administrative body does not make it Avholly immune from judicial review, but the scope of that review is limited to the determination of whether there has

Dayen Et Vir v. Penn Bus Co.

363 Pa. 176 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Sep 30, 1949

The laAV gave him that because, by proper legislation, Kelly Street has been established as a through street.” The Vehicle Code of May 1, 1929, P. … On the conflicting evidence it was clearly for the jury to determine whether the injuries of the wife-appellee were caused by the negligence of appellant’s driver, or Davis, or both, or neither.

Smith v. Brooks

394 Pa. Super. 327 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · May 24, 1990

Cairns based his opinion, which he was qualified to give, on his experience that trucks travelling in tandem often communicate via CB as to road conditions ahead. … It is well-settled that the admission of expert testimony is a matter within the sound discretion of the trial court, whose decision will not be reversed unless the court clearly abused that discretion. Pirches v.

Commonwealth v. Hutchinson

521 Pa. 482 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 15, 1989

Furthermore, the statement in issue was made after appellee’s arrest: clearly not a time when the effect of the statement could not have been foreseen. … Because appellee’s statement did not qualify as an admissible prior consistent statement appellee’s underlying claim was without merit. Consequently, there can be no finding of ineffectiveness.

Chirico v. BD. OF SUP'RS FOR NEWTOWN TP.

518 Pa. 572 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Jul 28, 1988

The Act clearly contemplates the payment of a disability pension. … Although the arbitrators appear to be qualifying the reduction in age, it is not absolute.

American Totalisator Co., Inc. v. Seligman

489 Pa. 568 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · May 30, 1980

As there is no dispute concerning American Totalisator’s status as a taxpayer, it clearly has standing to maintain the instant action. … It is true that the mere possession of discretionary power by an administrative body does not make it wholly immune from judicial review, but the scope of that review is limited to the determination of whether there has been

Mulholland v. Pittsburgh National Bank

418 Pa. 96 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 16, 1965

A study of the report of the commission appointed by the Florida court reveals clearly such limitation of its opinion as to her incompetency. … After March 18, 1955, appellee was under no legal disability such as would immunize her from the application of the doctrine of laches.

Penflex, Inc. v. Bryson

506 Pa. 274 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Dec 7, 1984

However, *292 that case is clearly distinguishable on its facts from the one now before us. … Accordingly, I would remand with instructions that the instant appellants should be determined to be entitled to benefits from the date that it is found that the employment relationship ceased, if they otherwise qualified