Case law

PENNSYLVANIA TURNPIKE COM'N v. Com.

899 A.2d 1085 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Jun 19, 2006

Therefore, the Commission argues that even if the Act could be construed as a pilot program, that fact would not render it immune from a valid Article III, Section 32 challenge. … The per se unconstitutionality standard is solidly rooted in our case law and was clearly set forth as a specific, albeit alternate, holding in Hickok I.

Commonwealth v. Lehigh Valley R. Co.

129 Pa. 429 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 7, 1889

provides that no person shall be deprived of„ his property without due process of law; and, third, with § 1 of article XIV., which provides that no state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities … the fourth section of the act of 1885, with the constitution of this state; but the same considerations which prevailed in the discussion of that question were then, and are now, supposed to be sufficient in the main to establish

Commonwealth v. Kosh

305 Pa. 146 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Sep 28, 1931

Its action is not reviewable on appeal unless it clearly appears byt the proof that the trial court’s determination of the matter was erroneous (see N. Y. Evening Post v. … Loomis, supra, where a former adjudication of insanity was held insufficient to establish incompetency; and see Com. v. Cilione, 293 Pa. 208 .

In Re: Nom. of Huff; Appeal of Huff

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Apr 24, 2025

In reaching this conclusion, we explained that we applied established law and noted that “Section 704(h) of the . . . … Section 704 quite clearly provides that it applies only when “determining the residence of a person desiring to register or vote.” 25 P.S. § 2814 (emphasis added).

Commonwealth v. Brewer

479 Pa. 558 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Jul 14, 1978

However, on cross-examination, the doctor qualified his opinion: “Q. … Altman’s testimony established a viable defense of insanity, the situation presented is ruled by Commonwealth v. Slavik, 449 Pa. 424 , 297 A.2d 920 (1972).

Commonwealth v. Light

458 Pa. 328 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 16, 1974

Lehigh Valley Trust Co., 457 Pa. 255 , 322 A.2d 114 (1974). [3] It is therefore, unnecessary for us to address ourselves to the question of whether the error, if such it was, was of the sort to qualify under the "basic and … Far from being "clearly objective," the second part of the test involves both objective and subjective considerations.

In re Anonymous No. 49 D.B. 83

26 Pa. D. & C.4th 169 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Feb 9, 1995

Petitioner has attended and successfully completed the Pennsylvania Bar Institute three day seminar at [ ] University, which course qualified as continuing legal education. (N.T. 19.) … Therefore the evidence, testimonial and documentary before the board, clearly and convincingly establishes petitioner’s complete rehabilitation from any alcohol or drug problem and his fitness for the practice of law.

Irwin Borough School District v. North Huntingdon Township School District

358 Pa. 78 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Sep 29, 1947

and maintenance of a joint high school, — a matter fully qualifying as the concern and responsibility, of the General .Assembly-, by virtue of specific constitutional mandateArticle X, Section 1, of the Pennsylvania Constitution … Eor the reasons herein given, which the learned court below so clearly set forth, I think the decree should be affirmed, and, accordingly, dissent. 1 Act of May 18, 1911, P. D. 309, Art.

Paternaster v. Lee

581 Pa. 28 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Dec 22, 2004

Finally, section 701(e)(ll) of the Act stated that “[t]he director shall issue rules and regulations consistent with this section regarding the establishment and operation of the fund including all procedures.... ” Id. at … Accordingly, contrary to Appellant’s claims, section 701 clearly vested the CAT Fund director with authority to issue substantive regulations regarding the operation of the fund, which inarguably includes the operation of

Commonwealth v. McCusker

448 Pa. 382 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Jun 28, 1972

The Commonwealth does not dispute the excellent quality of the evidence that appellant sought to introduce through the testimony of highly qualified professionals in the disciplines of psychology and psychiatry. … Clearly our recognition of the value of psychiatric evidence and its admissibility in determining whether a defendant acted in the heat of passion does not suggest that the M’Naghten test for legal sanity is being altered

Commonwealth v. Kloiber

378 Pa. 412 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Jun 28, 1954

Justice, later Chief Justice Drew, said (page 41) : , The facts and circumstances proved must, in order to warrant a conviction, be such as to establish the guilt of the defendant, not necessarily beyond a moral certainty … How far the Courts have gone in admitting weak or qualified or contradictory evidence of identity is apparent from Commonwealth v. Ronello, 251 Pa. 329 , 96 A. 826 ; Commonwealth v. Fink, 93 Pa.

Publicker Estate

385 Pa. 403 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Jun 25, 1956

Publicker did all that was essential to establish domicile in Philadelphia. … While the location of personal effects is a factor that may be considered in determining whether one has changed his domicile, that fact is clearly explained in the instant case by Mrs.

Mohamed v. Commonwealth, Department of Transportation, Bureau of Motor Vehicles

40 A.3d 1186 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 26, 2012

“Relatedly, it is well established that resort to the rules of statutory construction is to be made only when there is an ambiguity in the provision.” Oliver v. … See 67 Pa.Code § 177.3 ("A person who holds a valid certification card issued by the Bureau which certifies that the person is qualified and has passed the requirements to perform emission inspections on subject vehicles

Matter of Chiovero

524 Pa. 181 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Jan 24, 1990

This paradigm embraces all of the constitutional presumptions of innocence, all of the constitutional rights, powers, privileges and immunities of an accused known to our civil and criminal jurisprudence. … However, the Court in Cunningham clearly placed the burden on the jurist to legitimize any gift brought into question by the Board.

Mohamed v. Commonwealth, Department of Transportation

615 Pa. 6 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 26, 2012

“Relatedly, it is well established that resort to the rules of statutory construction is to be made only when there is an ambiguity in the provision.” Oliver v. … See 67 Pa.Code § 177.3 ("A person who holds a valid certification card issued by the Bureau which certifies that the person is qualified and has passed the requirements to perform emission inspections on subject vehicles

Gunter v. Workers' Compensation Appeal Board

573 Pa. 386 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Jun 16, 2003

The City, through appellant’s captain’s unau *399 thorized action, paid appellant IOD benefits without the Police Commissioner determining whether her injury qualified her for those benefits. … A decision that would allow appellant to convert undeserved IOD payments into a continuing entitlement to compensation benefits would be clearly erroneous.

In Re: Nom. of Huff; Appeal of Huff

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Apr 24, 2025

In reaching this conclusion, we explained that we applied established law and noted that “Section 704(h) of the . . . … Section 704 quite clearly provides that it applies only when “determining the residence of a person desiring to register or vote.” 25 P.S. § 2814 (emphasis added).

Mohn, D., Aplt. v. Bucks Co. Republican Committee

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Sep 22, 2021

.] - 4 the impact of recent federal court decisions necessitated reconsideration of the established rule. … Proclaiming “the right of qualified voters within a state to cast their ballot and have them counted at Congressional elections,” id. at 315, the Court held that Article I, Section 4, of the U.S.

Commonwealth v. Copeland

381 Pa. Super. 382 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Dec 21, 1988

To establish severe burning of his chest, appellant sought to introduce photographs of the scarring of his chest at the time of trial. … Indeed, the juror responded clearly that he would be able to follow the judge’s instructions and would require the Commonwealth to prove appellant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

Commonwealth v. Wojdak

502 Pa. 359 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 18, 1983

Clearly Wojdak was the “they” to whom Lynch had referred. … despite Wojdak’s last-ditch effort to salvage it by “holding” the Dental School’s letter of admission. *386 In light of all the testimony, particularly the testimony of Thomas Elliott, there is no basis on the record for immunizing