Case law

Jackson v. Workers' Compensation Appeal Board

626 Pa. 410 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Aug 6, 2014

Dunn v. Tax Review Board

502 Pa. 429 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 31, 1983

Mauch v. Allegheny County Retirement Board

381 Pa. 492 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Apr 18, 1955

See Baker v. Retirement Board of Allegheny County, 374 Pa. 165 , 97 A. 2d 231 ; Hickey v. Pittsburgh Pension Board, 378 Pa. 300 , 106 A. 2d 233 . However, the question arises: Was he so continuously employed? … Hunter v. Retirement Board of Allegheny County et al., 349 Pa. 224, 230 , 36 A. 2d 793 .

Biddle v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal Board

539 Pa. 343 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Jan 17, 1995

Appellant appealed to the Workmen’s Compensation Appeal Board (“Board”) which concluded that the decedent was not furthering the business of his employer. (Reproduced Record at 136a). … In Peterson v. Workmen’s Compensation Appeal Bd.

Radnor Township Electric Light Co. v. Brown

208 Pa. 461 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 21, 1904

Hughes v. Commonwealth, Pennsylvania Parole Board

633 Pa. 129 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 13, 2015

Nunez v. Workers' Compensation Appeal Board

632 Pa. 611 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Aug 26, 2015

Dicks v. Pennsylvania Board of Probation

631 Pa. 462 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Apr 27, 2015

Babac v. Pennsylvania Milk Marketing Board

531 Pa. 391 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Sep 18, 1992

See also Rivenbark v. Pennsylvania Board of Probation and Parole, 509 Pa. 248, 255 , 501 A.2d 1110, 1114 (1985). … See also O'Reilly v.

Terek v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal Board

542 Pa. 453 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Dec 6, 1995

The Workmen’s Compensation Appeal Board affirmed. … Lewis v. Workmen’s Compensation Appeal Board (Pittsburgh Board of Education), 508 Pa. 360, 366 , 498 A.2d 800, 803 (1985).

O'Donnell v. Pennsylvania Liquor Control Board

351 Pa. 129 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Nov 27, 1944

The Board notified the plaintiff of the objections, stating that the premises were so conducted as to constitute a nuisance. … L. 15, as amended, (47 P.S. 744-404) provides: “ ‘Any applicant who has appeared before the board, or any agent thereof, at any hearing as above provided, who is aggrieved by the refusal of the board ... to renew or transfer

Board of Public Education v. Soler

406 Pa. 168 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Dec 29, 1961

The lower Court held that the later opinions of this Court in Board of Public Education v. Intille, 401 Pa. 1 , 163 A. 2d 420 , and Board of Public Education v. Watson, 401 Pa. 62 , 163 A. 2d 60 , overruled Beilan . … Justice Frankfurter’s concurring opinion in Beilan v. Board of Public Education, 357 U.

Hill v. Zoning Hearing Board

534 Pa. 45 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · May 27, 1993

See Casey v. Zoning Hearing Board, 459 Pa. 219, 225-26 , 328 A.2d 464, 466-67 (1974); Boron Oil Co. v. Kimple, 445 Pa. 327 , 284 A.2d 744 (1971). … Accord Casey v. Zoning Hearing Board, supra; Boron Oil Co. v. Kimple, supra. Clearly, a municipality may refuse under the pending ordinance doctrine to issue a permit for a given land use.

Keene v. Workers' Compensation Appeal Board

81 A.3d 881 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Dec 9, 2013

Petition for Allowance of Appeal is GRANTED, the order of the Commonwealth Court is VACATED, and the mat *882 ter is remanded for reconsideration in light of City of Pittsburgh and UPMC Benefit Management Services, Inc. v. … Workers’ Compensation Appeal Board (Robinson), — Pa. -, 67 A.3d 1194 (2013). The Petition for Supersedeas is DENIED.

Kochanowicz v. Workers' Compensation Appeal Board

624 Pa. 307 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Feb 12, 2014

AND NOW, this 12th day of February, 2014, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is GRANTED, the Order of the Commonwealth Court is VACATED, and the matter is REMANDED for reconsideration in light of Payes v. … Workers’ Compensation Appeal Board (State Police), — Pa. -, 79 A.3d 543, 552 (2013) (holding that, because psychic injury cases are highly fact-sensitive, a reviewing court must give deference to the factfinding functions

Commonwealth v. Pinney

474 Pa. 210 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 7, 1977

The following morning, a bus driver telephoned the state police when he observed three men boarding his bus in Altoona, two of whom he thought matched the broadcast descriptions. Appellant was one of the passengers. … Appellant’s hair, as one officer testified, was light brown and could, in places, even be considered blond.

Schneller v. Pennsylvania Liquor Control Board

630 Pa. 315 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Dec 17, 2014

Pennsylvania Labor Relations Board v. Daum

365 Pa. 285 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Jun 26, 1950

This Court in Lester v. … The Pennsylvania Labor Relations Board, 364 Pa. 541 , 73 A. 2d 681 , stated the well established rule that findings of fact by a Labor Relations Board are conclusive if supported by substantial and legally credible evidence

Glickstein v. County Board of Elections

458 Pa. 640 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · May 3, 1974

Smith v. Zoning Board of Adjustment

415 Pa. 580 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Sep 29, 1964