Case law

Commonwealth v. Jackson

386 Pa. Super. 29 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Jul 12, 1989

The basis for this challenge was clearly proper. … Appellant maintains that this statement is clearly pretextual.

Commonwealth v. Mitchell

588 Pa. 19 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Jul 19, 2006

Thus, Attorney GuyMcCorkle’s lay testimony hardly qualifies as “extensive psychiatric testimony” establishing that at the time of the murder Appellant suffered from any mental disorder that prevented him from formulating … Bernstein, on the other hand, was qualified as an expert.

Genser v. Butler Brd. of Elec. Appeal of: RNC

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 23, 2024

The above statutory provisions clearly and unambiguously establish that an elector completes the act of voting either when the elector appears at the polling place and votes in person (by official or provisional ballot) … These provisions clearly establish the General Assembly’s intent that mail ballots must be both “cast” by the voter and “received” timely by the proper county board of elections to be included in the canvass.

Commonwealth v. Johnson

533 Pa. 24 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Nov 25, 1992

This agreement clearly stated that no immunity from the prosecution or other disciplinary proceedings would be afforded. … This possibility is all that is needed to establish the appearance of impropriety. Finally, appellant contends that the grant of new proceedings for appellees was inappropriate. We disagree.

In the Interest of: N.B.-A. Appeal of: E.A.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Jan 22, 2020

[J-66-2019] [MO: Todd, J.] - 3  With this prefatory language, the legislature clearly conveyed its intent to limit the scope of Section 6381(d) by adding a triggering provision within the text of the statute. … The argument of DHS and the Child Advocate seems to be that, by its nature of being illicit and surreptitious, all sexual abuse qualifies.

Pennsylvanians Against Gambling Expansion Fund, Inc. v. Commonwealth

583 Pa. 275 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Jun 22, 2005

Petitioners merge their arguments regarding single subject and clearly expressed title. … Petitioners have failed to establish that Article III, Section 10 was violated.

Weaver v. Welsh

325 Pa. 571 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Jan 25, 1937

Appellant cannot use that part of the answer which establishes appellee’s receipt of the property and, at the same time, exclude from the record the portion which qualifies and explains the circumstances under which the property … Edmunds, 325 Pa. 154 , clearly demonstrate that the old rule was completely abrogated by that act.

Commonwealth v. Edgerton Coal Co.

164 Pa. 284 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 1, 1894

The fourth and fifth sections of the act are void, the subject thereof not being clearly expressed in the title, as required by article 3, section in,- of the constitution of Pennsylvania. … But each may be taxed on the actual cash valuation from any relative evidence tending to establish the fact.

Commonwealth v. Courts

315 Pa. Super. 124 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Jun 3, 1983

This is clearly an insufficient basis upon which counsel could be held to be ineffective. … The policy behind the requirement of a manual signature on an information is well established. Recently, in Commonwealth v.

Peerless Dyeing Co. v. Industrial Risk Insurers

392 Pa. Super. 434 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Feb 28, 1990

Here, the evidence adduced at trial establishes neither part of this test. The language quoted above clearly states that underground water mains not on appellee’s property are not covered under the policy. … Despite *445 the fact that Manfra was qualified by appellee and the court as an expert, he candidly expressed his inability to pinpoint what went wrong.

Commonwealth v. Champney

619 Pa. 627 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Apr 24, 2013

While Champney was reading the probable cause affidavit, he made an unsolicited remark that Beth Bensinger probably got immunity. Id., at 404-05. … Qualifying any declaration with the words “I think” is simply not the same as asserting an unambiguous decision.

Commonwealth v. Butler

405 Pa. 36 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Jul 18, 1961

Certainly, this clearly indicates a struggle took place. … The poll of the jury clearly evidenced that each and every juror voted affirmatively for the verdict recorded.

Genser v. Butler Brd. of Elec. Appeal of: RNC

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 23, 2024

The above statutory provisions clearly and unambiguously establish that an elector completes the act of voting either when the elector appears at the polling place and votes in person (by official or provisional ballot) … These provisions clearly establish the General Assembly’s intent that mail ballots must be both “cast” by the voter and “received” timely by the proper county board of elections to be included in the canvass.

Pease v. Millcreek Township School District

412 Pa. 378 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 9, 1963

It is conceded that, as a classroom teacher in his qualified subjects, Pease always earned completely satisfactory ratings. … Our review of this record clearly reveals that this Board acted patiently, with restraint and in the utmost of good faith.

Hoffman v. Berwind-White Coal Mining Co.

265 Pa. 476 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Jan 5, 1920

With respect to the competency of witnesses offered by plaintiff to prove market value, while several of those called could not qualify as experts, they were residents in the neighborhood for many years and had known the … The words used were clearly harmful and calculated to incite the prejudice of the jury against defendant and fell within the scope of the statement of this court in Wagner v.

Bennett v. CENT. MONTGOMERY VO-TECH

550 Pa. 212 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Dec 29, 1997

No specific teacher certification was established for the position. … Throughout Dallap we clearly adhered to the legislature's dictate that seniority was the primary concern.

Eichenlaub's Estate

307 Pa. 357 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 16, 1932

The eighth paragraph does not reduce or qualify the estate given. … L. 403, 408, and we repeat here what we said there, quoting from Seewald’s Est., 281 Pa. 483 , 486: “The rule established by numerous decisions both before and since this legislation (Acts of 1897 and 1917, supra) is that

Commonwealth v. Appenzeller

388 Pa. Super. 172 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 16, 1989

This issue is clearly identical to the one reviewed recently by the Supreme Court in Commonwealth v. Durst, 522 Pa. 2 , 559 A.2d 504 (1989). … I, unlike the majority, do not believe that a prior sexual assault qualifies as "past sexual conduct. " Inherent in "conduct" is a volitional component which is obviously absent from an "assault."

Commonwealth v. Williams, J., Aplt.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Nov 21, 2018

A petitioner’s failure to establish any one prong is fatal to his claim. Id. at 1128. … With regard to the usurpation of his pro se status, Williams frames his claim as sounding directly in the violation of his right to self-representation and as a violation of due process, rather than doing so clearly, if

Beltzhoover v. Darragh

16 Serg. & Rawle 329 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Sep 28, 1827

The case is very fully and clearly stated in the opinion delivered by the Court of Common Pleas, and the true questions-stated. … It likewise establishes, that notice of the mortgage being a trust for residuary legatees, and that the parties had notice, is not material.