Case law

Crawford's Estate

340 Pa. 187 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 30, 1940

The qualifying phrase “as to all my property” discloses that the testator is here referring solely to the distributive provisions of the will and not to the administrative provisions. … The record clearly indicates that she has taken an active part in the administration.

Huntley & Huntley, Inc. v. Council of Oakmont

600 Pa. 207 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Feb 19, 2009

In reaching this holding, Huntley argues, the court applied the plain language of the Act, which clearly regulates where natural gas wells may or may not be situated, thereby preempting local regulation of this feature. … The preemption doctrine establishes a priority between potentially conflicting laws enacted by various levels of government.

Commonwealth v. Pursell

508 Pa. 212 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Jun 26, 1985

significant prior criminal record — he does have two thefts that were entered into evidence; that this defendant is a young man— those things standing next to him clearly — clearly cannot outweigh what this defendant has … Were it not so, had these circumstances not existed, you would not be required to do so, but now you find these circumstances to be true and that they have been shown to you and this death is one which qualifies as a torture

Commonwealth v. Scaramuzzino

485 Pa. 513 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Jul 5, 1979

I agree that appellant's entitlement to a new trial is clearly established by this record and the trial court's grant of a new trial must be affirmed. See Commonwealth v. … The former in context relates to a finding of evidence to support the verdict and hence qualifies the "right" by requiring evidence.

Creighan v. Pittsburgh

389 Pa. 569 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · May 27, 1957

The Statutory Construction Act of 1937 2 provides: “No law shall be construed to be retroactive unless clearly and manifestly so intended.” … If this letter had contained only the first paragraph, it would clearly constitute a resignation as a fireman and a complete severance of the relationship between appellee and the City.

In re Objections to the Nominating Petitions of Rankin

583 Pa. 38 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · May 12, 2005

The record below established that respondent was admitted to practice law in Pennsylvania in 1992 and practiced for approximately ten years. … Respondent could no longer practice law as a profession or as a business, and “attorney” was clearly not her current occupation.

Commonwealth v. Yabor

376 Pa. Super. 356 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Jun 29, 1988

Thus, the right to confront witnesses is qualified by existing testimonial privileges of witnesses, including the privilege against self-incrimination. See Commonwealth v. Allen, 501 Pa. 525 , 462 A.2d 624, 627 (1983). … The prosecutor may always argue to the jury that the evidence establishes the defendant’s guilt, Commonwealth v.

Commonwealth v. Hicks, M., Aplt.

208 A.3d 916 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · May 31, 2019

In terms of actually discovering unlicensed drivers or deterring them from driving, the spot check does not appear sufficiently productive to qualify as a reasonable law enforcement practice under the Fourth Amendment. … In short, by deeming licensure an affirmative defense to the crime of carrying a firearm on the streets of Philadelphia, the legislature clearly intended "to aid in the efforts of law enforcement in the protection of the

Commonwealth v. Jones Jr., R., Aplt.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 30, 2020

found merely because an appellate court might have reached a different conclusion, but requires a result of manifest unreasonableness, or partiality, prejudice, bias, or ill-will, or such a lack of support so as to be clearly … We concluded that based upon research available at the time, expert testimony on this topic should have been precluded as it was not “sufficiently established to have gained general acceptance in the particular field in which

Drake v. Kiely

93 Pa. 492 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 10, 1879

The trespass in this case was clearly established by undisputed testimony. … The instruction thus given was both appropriate and adequate, and is here referred to at length for the purpose of showing how some of the detached sentences of the charge assigned for error are explained and qualified by

Commonwealth v. Dunn, R., Aplt.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Jun 23, 2023

(2) If qualified as an expert, the witness may testify to facts and opinions regarding specific types of victim responses and victim behaviors. … The OISA waves away Dunn’s request by declaring that an expert report had been provided, ignoring that Dunn was clearly requesting the production of an expert report that was compliant with Rule 573, and that he implicitly

King v. Equitable Gas Co.

307 Pa. 287 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 18, 1932

This seems to imply an admission that the proof as to one of those “possible causes,” if standing alone, would have been sufficient to establish defendant’s liability; and this, as we will now show, is clearly so. … Of course this cannot be so. *294 We have no intention of qualifying the rule that there can be no recovery if the injury of which complaint is made, may equally well, under the uncontradicted evidence or that believed by

Patton v. Republic Steel Corp.

342 Pa. Super. 101 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Apr 26, 1985

These allegations, if proven, would establish that Republic had engaged in bituminous mining operations “in such a negligent manner as to cause the caving in, collapse, or subsidence of ... … Stein involved a waivable statute of limitations and Barber an immunity issue. It is not clear that their holdings can be extended to constitutional challenges.

Field v. Golden Triangle Broadcasting, Inc.

451 Pa. 410 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · May 4, 1973

Appellant contends that even though the writing involved is in form an offer and acceptance, its qualifying words are such that it can be construed merely as an arrangement of terms in contemplation of the parties future … At trial it was clearly established that in the Spring of 1968, Triangle had engaged Blackburn & Co. to obtain a purchaser for the radio stations.

Commonwealth v. Sessoms

516 Pa. 365 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 7, 1987

Ill, § 2; limiting bills to only one subject clearly identified in the bill’s title, Art. Ill, § 3; and requiring consideration on three different days in each House, Art. Ill, § 4. … It appears that under the guidelines initially approved, Sessoms, with no prior record score, would have qualified for a minimum sentence in the range of 8 to IIV2 months for the aggravated assault conviction.

Commonwealth v. Spotz

563 Pa. 269 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 20, 2000

Here, the evidence was relevant to establish motive, ie., appellant’s need to escape after the previous killings, his intent, his identity as the killer, and to establish the sequence of events leading up to the *279 murder … To the extent that relevant evidence nevertheless may not qualify for one of those two enumerated mitigating circumstances, it can always be considered under subsection (e)(8). Id. (emphasis in original).

Commonwealth v. Wright

599 Pa. 270 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Dec 22, 2008

Appellant notes the American Bar Association (ABA) guidelines recommend two qualified trial attorneys should represent the defendant in death penalty cases. … As appellant has not established how this prejudiced him, his argument fails.

Wilt v. Snyder

17 Pa. 77 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Aug 12, 1851

It is to be remarked, that there the witness was clearly incompetent by reason of interest; and what was said by the learned judge in relation to his exclusion. from testifying, by reason of having been the bona fide owner … Had Barber’s deposition been admitted in evidence, it would have been pertinent to contradict or qualify the testimony of Barber by the testimony of Chandler.

Commonwealth v. Johnson, K., Aplt.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · May 19, 2020

Such application, Appellant maintains, would result in his immunity from retrial. See id. at 38-39. … He did not even notice this error at the preliminary hearing when he had in his possession property receipt number 2425291, which clearly stated that it was associated with a black baseball cap.

Commonwealth v. Besch

544 Pa. 1 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Apr 17, 1996

I recognize that this well-established line of federal cases is not binding on us in interpreting our own state statute. … For example, associations of persons engaged solely in “loan sharking, the theft of and fencing of property, the importation and distribution of narcotics and other dangerous drugs” [ 84 Stat. 922 -23] would be immune from