Case law

Opinions from 1658 to today.

Filterspa

10,000+ results

0.41s

  • City of Philadelphia v. Pennsylvania Labor Relations Board

    531 Pa. 489 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Sep 16, 1992

    . §§ 1101.801-1101.802, (the act), govern the bargaining obligations of public employers and unions, as well as the role of the Pennsylvania Labor Relations Board (the board) in the collective bargaining process. … , and the board, acting “in no event later than one hundred thirty days prior to the ‘budget submission date,’ ” 1 may appoint a factfinder.

    Cited 5 timesPublished
  • Thomas v. Commonwealth, Pennsylvania Board of Probation & Parole

    888 A.2d 640 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Dec 27, 2005

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Commonwealth Ex Rel. Davis v. Pennsylvania Board of Parole

    484 Pa. 157 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 16, 1979

    It has been held a proceeding in mandamus is available to compel the Board to conduct a hearing or correct a mistake in applying the law. 3 See Moore v. … Roth, supra, the claim was based upon the Board’s failure to conduct a hearing in conformity with the law, and in Commonwealth ex rel. Salerno v.

    Cited 21 timesPublished
  • City of McKeesport v. Workers' Compensation Appeal Board (Miletti)

    560 Pa. 413 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Jan 19, 2000

    The Workers’ Compensation Appeal Board (Board) affirmed. The Commonwealth Court, en banc, reversed the order of the Board. The court determined that Mrs. … See Price v. Workmen’s Compensation Appeal Bd. (Metallurgical Resources), 533 Pa. 500 , 626 A.2d 114, 117 (1993).

    Cited 23 timesPublished
  • Greenwood Gaming & Entertainment, Inc. v. Pennsylvania Gaming Control Board

    609 Pa. 368 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 8, 2011

    is limited to determining whether the Board: (1) erred as a matter of law; or (2) acted arbitrarily and in capricious disregard of the evidence. 4 Pa.C.S. § 1204; Pocono Manor Investors, L.P. v. … Riverwalk Casino L.P. v. Pennsylvania Gaming Control Board, 592 Pa. 505 , 926 A.2d 926, 929 (2007).

    Cited 8 timesPublished
  • SPUCK v. Pennsylvania Board of Probation and Parole

    606 Pa. 40 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · May 17, 2010

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Duffey v. Workers' Compensation Appeal Board (Trola-Dyne, Inc.)

    635 Pa. 61 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Feb 3, 2016

    Petitioner : : Petition for Allowance of Appeal from : the Order of the Commonwealth Court v … : : : WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEAL : BOARD (TROLA-DYNE, INC.), :

    Cited 1 timesPublished
  • Gaskin v. Pennsylvania Board of Probation and Parole

    605 Pa. 635 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Apr 28, 2010

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Schoellhammer's Hatboro Manor, Inc. v. Local Joint Executive Board

    426 Pa. 53 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Jun 29, 1967

    Justice Jones, The Local Joint Executive Board of Philadelphia County, Local Unions Nos. … In Goldstein v.

    Cited 19 timesPublished
  • Pennsylvania Labor Relations Board v. Mars Area School District

    480 Pa. 295 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Jul 19, 1978

    In Pa.L.R.B. v. … In Dublin Professional Firefighters v.

    Cited 34 timesPublished
  • Madway v. Board for the Assessment & Revision of Taxes

    427 Pa. 138 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Sep 26, 1967

    In both Kitty Roup’s Case, 81* Pa. 211 (1874) and City of Williamsport v. Brown, 84 Pa. 438 (1877) ordinances taxing rural and urban property at different rates were sustained. Accord, Jermyn v. … See McKnight Shopping Center, Inc. v. Board of Property Assessment, 417 Pa. 234 , 209 A. 2d 389 (1965); Buhl Foundation v. Board of Property Assessment, 407 Pa. 567 , 180 A. 2d 900 (1962).

    Cited 22 timesPublished
  • Citizens Committee to Recall Rizzo v. Board of Elections

    470 Pa. 1 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Nov 19, 1976

    Mellinger v. Kuhn, supra; Commonwealth v. Mitchell, 82 Pa. 343 (1876). In Commonwealth v. … In a mandamus action, the court has no authority to weigh the evidence before the Board. See Slessinger v. Fairley, 340 Pa. 273 , 16 A.2d 710 (1940); Raffel v. Pittsburgh, 340 Pa. 243 , 16 A.2d 392 (1940).

    Cited 34 timesPublished
  • Dorsey v. Pennsylvania Board of Probation and Parole

    968 A.2d 1253 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 18, 2009

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • McKeesport Hospital v. Pennsylvania State Board of Medicine

    539 Pa. 384 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Jan 20, 1995

    The board, having been created by statute, has only such powers as the legislature has expressly or by necessary implication provided. Department of Environmental Re *389 sources v. … than by the board.

    Cited 1 timesPublished
  • J.G. Furniture Division v. Workers' Compensation Appeal Board

    585 Pa. 473 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Dec 21, 2005

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Matter of Cunningham

    517 Pa. 417 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Feb 25, 1988

    The Board found that respondent accepted $300 cash from Thomas Brown in December 1983. … The agents asked him if he knew “Tommy Brown,” to which he replied that he did not. However, he did identify a photo of Brown as “Tom Brown, a person he knew from the courts.”

    Cited 48 timesPublished
  • Benchoff v. Pennsylvania Board of Probation and Parole

    605 Pa. 629 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Apr 28, 2010

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Lewisburg Area Education Ass'n v. Board of School Directors

    474 Pa. 102 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Aug 17, 1977

    . * In Community College of Beaver County, Society of the Faculty v. … Co. v. Fletcher, 405 F.2d 1123, 1128 (3d Cir. 1969). See also Washington Arbitration Case, 436 Pa. 168 , 259 A.2d 437 (1969).

    Cited 7 timesPublished
  • Smith, K., Aplt. v. PA Board of Probation & Parole

    Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Feb 21, 2019

    : No. 34 MAP 2018 : Appellant : : : v … : : : COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, : PENNSYLVANIA BOARD OF : PROBATION AND

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • D. L. Ward Co. v. Tax Review Board

    422 Pa. 584 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Sep 27, 1966

    In each category the Tax Review Board held that the sales were at retail, but was reversed by the court of common pleas which held that they were sales at wholesale. … Brown é Zortman Machinery Company v. Pittsburgh, 375 Pa. 250, 256 , 100 A. 2d 98, 102 (1953). In Kerchner, Marshall & Company v.

    Cited 3 timesPublished

Ask Donna

Ask Donna

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.