Case law

Doyle v. South Pittsburgh Water Co.

414 Pa. 199 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 17, 1964

Since the defendant demurred, the averments in the complaint will be accepted as established fact. … Hence, if there was any immunity to be enjoyed by the municipality, and we need not decide that issue here, it would not be available to the independent contractor, as we clearly stated in Ference v.

Philadelphia v. Philadelphia Transportation Co.

400 Pa. 315 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Jun 3, 1960

John Joseph Dowling, Jr., a well qualified orthopedic surgeon, testified that he treated Echeverría for a comminuted fracture of the left femur, together with multiple lacerations and contusions. … The verdict must be clearly and immoderately excessive to justify the granting of a new trial.

Commonwealth v. Schuylkill Trust Co.

315 Pa. 429 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 19, 1934

There was no infringement of the immunity from taxation of government securities for the reason that the tax here in question was levied upon the shares qua shares and not upon the assets of the corporation: Northern Trust … The principle that shares of stock of a corporation may be taxed by the state of incorporation whether in the hands of resident or nonresident owners, is clearly upheld in Corry v. Baltimore, 196 U.

In Re Milton S. Hershey Medical Center of the Pennsylvania State University

535 Pa. 9 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Nov 4, 1993

HIV causes the fatal disease known as Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS). … Disclosure did not undermine the policy favoring confidentiality which was established by the legislature.

Stinner v. Stinner

520 Pa. 374 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Feb 8, 1989

Stinner’s pension, which Bethlehem Steel established under the provisions of ERISA. … Clearly, if Congress had intended a statute, it would have said so. . 1972 Pa. Laws 202 , amending 1929 Pa. Laws 430 , codified at 23 Pa.Stat. § 48, repealed by 1980 Pa.

Michael v. Hahnemann Medical College & Hospital of Philadelphia

404 Pa. 424 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Jun 27, 1961

view of the decisions of the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania which clearly and unquestionably, established charitable immunity from torts and iterated and reiterated it over and over again from 1888 to 1958 — is not only an … In 1777 the rule of charitable immunity was clearly part of the common law of England. As early as 1811 this Court in Clayton v.

Estate of Frederick v. Alley Medical Ctr

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Apr 25, 2025

In the subsequent negligence action, the hospital claimed immunity under Section 114 of the MHPA. The Superior Court held that immunity was not available because Fogg had not been treated under the Act. … The same is true for the voluntary admission process established in Article II.

Estate of Frederick v. Geisinger Medical Ctr

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Apr 25, 2025

In the subsequent negligence action, the hospital claimed immunity under Section 114 of the MHPA. The Superior Court held that immunity was not available because Fogg had not been treated under the Act. … The same is true for the voluntary admission process established in Article II.

Millcreek Township v. Perry

8 Sadler 474 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Nov 7, 1887

There was nothing, either admitted or established by undisputed evidence, that would have justified the court in withdrawing the question from the jury and deciding as matter of law that plaintiff was guilty of contributory … Defendant’s first and second points were rightly qualified by saying “that if the jury find from the evidence that the failure, on plaintiff’s part, to go through the excavated way, was in consequence of the darkness, and

Freach v. Commonwealth

471 Pa. 558 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Feb 28, 1977

We have held, however, that legislative authorization of suits against the Commonwealth is not to be inferred from language which less than clearly expresses an intent to subject the Commonwealth to suit. In Brown v. … Of course, the Legislature has authority to establish the scope of official immunity.

Housing Auth. v. PA CIVIL SERVICE COM'N

730 A.2d 935 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Apr 30, 1999

The establishment of conditions of service which will attract to the service of the Commonwealth qualified persons of character and ability and their appointment and promotion on the basis of merit and fitness are means to … Thus, the Commission is charged with promulgating rules and regulations to effectuate the purpose of the act, and the purpose of the Act, inter alia, is to establish conditions by which qualified persons of character and

Lesko v. Frankford Hospital-Bucks County

609 Pa. 115 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Jan 19, 2011

This is especially true in light of the fact that the same sentence naming the general amount owed under the contract is clearly qualified by specific contractual provisions. … The language appellee claims requires appellants to act establishes intent and consent, not obligation and duty; while the contract clearly assumes appellants would exercise their option tó purchase an annuity, no language

Commonwealth v. Cauto

369 Pa. Super. 381 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Dec 4, 1987

Judge Beck, writing for the court, stated: The evidence adduced at trial in the instant case clearly supports the finding that the appellants solicited the police officers to engage in specific conduct which would establish … The record fails to establish any such abuse or error here.

Haverford Township v. Siegle

346 Pa. 1 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Sep 30, 1942

It is rather' - legislation affecting several well-established classes of municipalities, and applying to all members within those recognized classes if or when they have or acquire three or more police-officers. … He held that the act designating Titusville as a place for the county coart to sit was clearly special, since it applied only to Titusville and could never apply to any other city, and the correctness of this result is of

City of Philadelphia v. District Council 33

525 Pa. 468 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 5, 1990

The Union failed to establish such a right. … "No ex post facto law, nor any law impairing the obligation of contracts, or making irrevocable any grant of special privileges or immunities, shall be passed.” Pa. Const, art. I, § 17. 3 .

Commonwealth v. Moore

255 Pa. 402 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Jan 8, 1917

We think this principle governs the present case, as the Act of 1895 shows clearly a general intent upon the part of the legislature to establish - a uniform and mandatory system, providing controllers in all counties having … There is certainly no “clearly apparent” intent in the Act of 1895, that a local act shall not be repealed.

Grubb v. Mahoning Navigation Co.

14 Pa. 302 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 15, 1850

into a body politic and corporate, in deed and in law, by the name, style, and title of the “ President, Managers, and Company of the Mahoning Navigation Company,” by which name the said subscribers shall enjoy all the immunities … Clearly this was all it was necessary to do, in order to establish the corporate existence.

Marshall v. Port Authority

524 Pa. 1 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Jan 17, 1990

Clearly, PAT may claim sovereign immunity if it is a "Commonwealth party." A "Commonwealth party" is defined in 42 Pa.C.S. § 8501 as "[a] Commonwealth agency and any employee thereof. . . ." … Hence, the question arises as to whether the legislature intended the immunity statutes merely to re-establish the state of immunity that existed prior to Ayala and Mayle , or whether they were intended to extend the benefits

Commonwealth v. Williams

388 Pa. Super. 153 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Sep 25, 1989

As for its decision not to grant appellant immunity, the Commonwealth posits that immunity is not offered until a witness asserts his Fifth Amendment Rights. In this case, no request was made. … The witness’s testimony at the suppression hearing of April 28, 1986 clearly evidences this. At that hearing the witness testified as follows: [BY THE PROSECUTION]: Q. At any rate, did you talk with Detective O’Leary?

Ganster v. Metropolitan Electric Co.

214 Pa. 628 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Apr 9, 1906

The defendant corporation was clearly liable for the nuisance committed against the plaintiffs in the operation of its plant. … He clearly misapprehends the ruling in that case and misapplies the doctrine there announced to the facts of the case in hand.