Case law

Commonwealth v. Carson

590 Pa. 501 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Dec 27, 2006

Since Miller establishes the appropriateness of the prosecutor’s questions and Ms. … Death Qualified Jurors 23 Declaring that he is entitled to a new sentencing hearing, appellant claims that his sentencing jury was partial because the jury was not life-qualified and that death-qualified jurors were improperly

Sloppy v. Pennsylvania Railroad Co.

228 Pa. 636 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Jul 1, 1910

The evidence establishes clearly, as the proximate cause of the accident, the failure on the part of the fireman to communicate to the engineer the order given by the conductor to halt the train. … There was nothing in the evidence which in anyway qualified this positive and direct testimony. The only question then was, was the plaintiff’s husband a fellow servant with those employed in the running of the train?

Stoltz v. McConnon

473 Pa. 157 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Jun 3, 1977

(Supp.1976-77), in order to establish, develop, and maintain an integrated mass transportation system for the Philadelphia metropolitan area. … contrary, where the applicable statute provides for a vote to be decided by a majority of the electorate, all that is required is a majority of those actually voting on the question as long as the election is available to all qualified

Rudolph v. Pennsylvania Schuylkill Valley Railroad

186 Pa. 541 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Jul 21, 1898

But this qualified right appertaining to his property along the stream adds to the value of the property. … The intention of that act clearly was to authorize the appropriation by a railroad company, for steam and other railroad purposes, of water and water rights.

Katz v. Katz

356 Pa. Super. 461 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Aug 19, 1986

However, the Supreme Court of Rhode Island, in a pretwentieth century decision, discussed this qualified, common law right of access in the context of domestic relations cases as follows: [I]t is clearly within the rule to … “Good cause,” the Court said, “is established on a showing that disclosure will work a clearly defined and serious injury to the party seeking closure.” Id. at 1071, citing Zenith Radio Corp. v.

Foust v. Commonwealth

33 Pa. 338 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Jul 1, 1858

But the constitution gives the legislature, in the words “ until *340 otherwise directed ly law,” power to alter the Courts of Common Pleas as established in the Constitution, and when they have altered that system by requiring … Much more should such a record be required from a legislative court, called into being by a temporary emergency, and clothed with only a qualified jurisdiction in criminal matters.

Dodson v. Ball

60 Pa. 492 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · May 11, 1869

In order to decide it, it will be proper to refer to some leading and established principles in the doctrine of trusts. Trusts are of two kinds, simple and special: Vaux v. Park, 7 W. & S. 25 . … He was clearly right, for undoubtedly upon the terms of the wills in those' cases the opposite presumption was true, the words being those of purchase and not of limitation.

Commonwealth v. McClintic

589 Pa. 465 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Nov 22, 2006

The word “such” is somehow said to refer to “current offense,” which it clearly does not. … The question is whether, once sufficient separate prior convictions are established, all subsequent crimes of violence, be they in one episode or 20, are enhanced.

Quinn v. Wallace

6 Whart. 452 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · May 1, 1841

This is clearly deducible even from what Lord Mansfield has said in Hutchins v. … Now in order to show more clearly that it was not only the duty of the landlord in this case to have alleged his reason for making the second distress, but likewise to have established it by sufficient proof, let us suppose

Commonwealth v. Cook

558 Pa. 50 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Jul 23, 1999

Case law has established that certain facts, taken alone, do not establish reasonable suspicion. Commonwealth v. … Banks, 540 Pa. 453 , 658 A.2d 752 (1995), Banks is clearly distinguishable, because Banks involved probable cause.

Citizens Electric Illuminating Co. v. Lackawanna & Wyoming Valley Power Co.

255 Pa. 145 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 2, 1910

This language clearly and expressly limits the authority of a water company to the municipal or quasi municipal division in which it is located. … No more is it necessary that the complainant should establish the loss it would suffer by the unlawful invasion, it not being a question of the amount of damage, but simply one of right.

Commonwealth v. Minerd

562 Pa. 46 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Jun 20, 2000

“Evidence is relevant if it logically tends to establish a material fact in the case, tends to make a fact at issue more or less probable, or supports a reasonable inference or presumption regarding the existence of a material … Moreover, the trial judge clearly advised the jury that they were not bound to accept the expert’s testimony merely because she possessed special skill or knowledge. N.T. at 253.

Kramer v. Winslow

130 Pa. 484 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Jan 6, 1890

No question of that kind could have arisen unless Winslow had proven very clearly indeed that before obtaining that paper he had informed Kramer very fully, and with perfect truthfulness, of the fact that he had contracted … The defendant’s own testimony established his own liability beyond all question, and the jury should have been so instructed.

In Re: Recount of Ballots

457 Pa. 279 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Jul 1, 1974

Clearly, this at best is an ingenious attempt to extend the time to request a recount of the remaining election boxes within the County which we will not permit. … The case law interpreting this section clearly announces a policy to interpret this section to favor enfranchisement rather than disenfranchisement.

Commonwealth v. Natividad

595 Pa. 188 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Dec 27, 2007

These boilerplate claims were clearly insufficient to establish either the reasonable-basis or the prejudice prong of the Pierce test. See Bracey, supra. Moreover, we find no merit to Appellant’s underlying claims. … Life-Qualifying the Jury Appellant asserts that he was prejudiced by the trial court’s and counsel’s failure to “lile-qualify” the jury.

Williams v. Geico Government Employees Insurance

613 Pa. 113 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 19, 2011

It further establishes a rebuttable presumption that the disease was caused by the employee’s duties. Id. … This presumption shall be rebutted if the employer has established an employment screening program, in accordance with guidelines established by the department in coordination with the Department of Health and the Pennsylvania

Melvin v. Doe

575 Pa. 264 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Nov 19, 2003

We agree with the Superior Court that the denial of the motion for summary judgment would not qualify as a collateral order. … To that end, each prong of the collateral order doctrine must be clearly present before an order may be considered collateral.

Commonwealth v. Moody

429 Pa. 39 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 15, 1968

Ct. 1594 , 1609 n.18 (1964), a case involving the scope of taint where it was alleged that testimony given after a grant of immunity by one jurisdiction had been employed to obtain information used in a prosecution in another … jurisdiction, the Supreme Court insisted: "Once a defendant demonstrates that he has testified, under a state grant of immunity, to matters related to the federal prosecution, the federal authorities have the burden of showing

McFadden v. McFadden

386 Pa. Super. 506 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Aug 2, 1989

The court further opined that David McFadden’s retirement was a foreseeable and expected change and did not qualify as a substantial change in circumstances which would warrant modification. … Thus, under the present circumstances, the alimony award did not need to reflect the contingency of voluntary retirement which was approximately five years in the offing. 3 Pennsylvania case law clearly establishes that retirement

United States v. Harris, M., Aplt.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Feb 22, 2023

It agrees with Thomas’ conclusion that there was sufficient evidence to establish first-degree aggravated assault under the facts presented because murder by starvation clearly involves the infliction of “serious bodily … The United States and the Commonwealth also devote substantial argument in an effort to establish that physical force can be applied both directly and indirectly.