Case law

Cianfrani v. COM., STATE EMP. RETIRE. BD.

505 Pa. 294 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Jun 28, 1984

Box Office Pictures, Inc. v. Board of Finance and Review, 402 Pa. 511, 517 , 166 A.2d 656, 660 (1961), quoting Chicot County Drainage District v. … Cianfrani v. Comm., State Employees' Retirement Board, supra; Harvey v. Retirement Board of Allegheny County, 392 Pa. 421 , 141 A.2d 197 (1958).

Doyle v. Springfield Township

394 Pa. 49 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Nov 10, 1958

See Herskovits v. Irwin, 299 Pa. 155, 160 , 149 A. 195 ; Wright v. France, 279 Pa. 22, 25-26 , 123 A. 586 ; Coyne v. Prichard, 272 Pa. 424, 427 , 116 A. 315 , and the many cases there cited. … See also Dooling’s Windy Hill, Inc. v. Springfield Township Zoning Board of Adjustment, 371 Pa. 290 , 89 A. 2d 505 ; and Sawdey Liquor License Case, 369 Pa. 19 , 85 A. 2d 28 .

Discovery Charter School v. School District of Philadelphia

166 A.3d 304 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Aug 8, 2017

Johnson v. Lansdale Borough, 146 A.3d at 711 . … Sch. v.

Tropiano v. Travelers Insurance

455 Pa. 360 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 25, 1974

In DeJesus v. Liberty Mutual Insurance Co., 439 Pa. 180 , 268 A. 2d 924 (1970), and Brown v. … In DeJesus , tbe court specifically stated as follows: “. . . in order to dispel any doubt that may have been caused by our decision in Brown, we now specifically find that tbe purpose of Section 18 [of tbe Pennsylvania Constitution

Zeigenfuse v. Boltz

401 Pa. 365 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 27, 1960

Magaro v. Metropolitan Edison Company, 315 Pa. 369 , 172 Atl. 865 (1934) ; Trestrail v. Johnson, 297 Pa. 49 , 146 Atl. 150 (1929) ; Watkins v. Neff, 287 Pa. 202 , 134 Atl. 625 (1926). … See Butcher v. Rice, 397 Pa. 158 , 153 A. 2d 869 , and Costello v. Rice, 397 Pa. 198 , 153 A. 2d 888 .

Lance Appeal

399 Pa. 311 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Apr 18, 1960

Forty-seven out of forty-eight of the neighbors. protested . a.nd the Board of .Adjustment unanimously refused the permit. … Walker v. Zoning Board of Adjustment, 380 Pa. 228, 234 , 110 A. 2d 414 ; Volpe Appeal, 384 Pa. 374 , 121 A. 2d. 97.

County of Lehigh v. Commonwealth

504 Pa. 237 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Feb 2, 1984

Good Fellowship Ambulance Club's Appeal

406 Pa. 465 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 13, 1962

Within the terms of this section appear basic standards and a definite policy and rule of action sufficient for the guidance of the board in the exercise of its discretion: Katzin v. … In construing this ordinance we adopt that interpretation which will prevent any conflict with the Constitution: Fidelity-Philadelphia Trust Co. v. Hines, 337 Pa. 48 , 10 A. 2d 553 ; Hotel Casey Co. v.

Commonwealth v. Crawley

514 Pa. 539 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · May 27, 1987

Hernandez, 498 Pa. 405, 415 , 446 A.2d 1268, 1273 (1982), citing Commonwealth v. Brown, 489 Pa. 285 , 414 A.2d 70 (1980); Commonwealth v. Stoltzfus, 462 Pa. 43 , 337 A.2d 873 (1975); Commonwealth v. … Commonwealth v.

Krinks' Appeal

332 Pa. 236 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Sep 30, 1938

the board’s *243 earlier action. … 1935, unappealed from, conclusively determined that the premises in question could not be used for the purposes of a restaurant and beer garden; that conclusion should have been held to end the proceedings: compare Taylor v.

Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Davis

532 Pa. 22 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Sep 16, 1992

Campbell, 463 Pa. 472 , 345 A.2d 616 (1975), as well as to the recommendations of the Board, Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Costigan, 526 Pa. 16 , 584 A.2d 296 (1990). Also see, Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. … The Board cites to Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Lucarini, 504 Pa. 271 , 472 A.2d 186 (1983), and Office of Disciplinary Counsel v.

Buffo v. Baltimore & Ohio Railroad

364 Pa. 437 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Apr 10, 1950

Rights of recovery *439 authorized by Federal laws may not be defeated either by State law or practice: Davis, Director General of Railroads, Etc. v. Wechsler, 263 U. S. 22, 24 ; Brown v. … In Brown v. Western Railway of Alabama, 338 U.

Kaufmann's Estate

281 Pa. 519 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 14, 1924

Brown, his attorney. … Brown, Record 227a.

Hoefling v. Zoning Hearing Bd. of Monroe Twp. & Monroe Twp.

211 A.3d 750 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · May 24, 2019

24 th day of May, 2019, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is GRANTED, the Commonwealth Court's order is VACATED, and this matter is remanded for proceedings consistent with this Court's decision in Slice of Life, LLC v.

Clean Air Council, Aplts v. DEP and Sunoco

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Feb 22, 2023

Lucchino v. Commonwealth, 809 A.2d 264, 269 (Pa. 2002) (quoting Tunison v. Commonwealth, 31 A.2d 521, 523 (Pa. 1943)). … See, Lucchino v.

General v. E. Roseman Company

461 Pa. 284 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Apr 17, 1975

In Fritsch v. … See Patter v. Superior Steel Co., 263 Pa. 244 , 106 A.2d 202 (1919); Crucible Steel Co. of America v. Workmen’s Compensation Appeal Board, 9 Pa.Cmwlth. 269 , 306 A.2d 395 (1973).

Lieberman v. Abat's Auto Tag Service, Inc.

344 Pa. Super. 350 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Aug 2, 1985

In April of 1981, appellant Lieberman was struck and injured by Brown in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. … Appellant relies upon Lyngarkos v.

Ward's Appeal

289 Pa. 458 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 17, 1927

Superior Ct. 000 (filed March 3, 1927), which deals with the constitutionality of the present board of appeals under the above article and section. Our attention has been called to Smith v. … of appeals is affirmed, at cost of appellant. * See also opinion by Judge Sutherland in Zahn v.

Dellenbaugh v. COM. CAT FUND

562 Pa. 558 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Aug 22, 2000

See generally Tool Sales & Service Co. v. Commonwealth, 536 Pa. 10, 22 , 637 A.2d 607, 613 (1993) (agencies are accorded deference in interpreting the statutes they enforce). … Commonwealth Court relied on its own decision in Central Dauphin School District v.

In Re: Administrative Governing Board of the First Judicial District

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Jan 27, 2016

AND NOW, this 27th day of January, 2016, IT IS ORDERED, pursuant to this Court’s general supervisory and administrative authority governing practice in the Courts of this Commonwealth as set forth in Article V, … (D) The Board shall in all instances act in accordance with the vote of the majority of its six voting members. Each of the Board’s voting members shall have one vote.