Case law

Stimmler v. Chestnut Hill Hospital

596 Pa. 582 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Apr 29, 2008

Commonwealth v. Kubiac

379 Pa. Super. 402 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Nov 2, 1988

Brown v. Brown, 455 Pa. 274, 276-77 , 314 A.2d 506, 509 (1974); Commonwealth v. Allen, 443 Pa. 96, 103-04 , 277 A.2d 803, 806 (1971). In Commonwealth v. … This same result was reached by that court in Commonwealth v. Brown, supra, where again, the trial court attempted to augment an existing sentence.

Absentee Ballots Case

431 Pa. 165 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Sep 4, 1968

In Perles v. Northumberland Co. … (Sablosky v. Messner, 372 Pa. 47 .)

Stump v. Follmer Trucking Co.

448 Pa. 313 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Jun 28, 1972

The Board did not see fit to resolve this conflict in the testimony or to decide if there existed any causal connection between the emotional excitement resulting from the accident and the thrombosis. Citing Bussone v. … See generally Hamilton v. Procon, Inc., 434 Pa. 90 , 252 A. 2d 601 (1969); Mohler v. Cook, 205. Pa. Superior Ct. 232, 209 A. 2d 7 (1965); Morgan v. Michael Baker, Jr., Inc., 204 Pa.

Armbruster v. Horowitz

572 Pa. 1 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Dec 31, 2002

Citing to Commonwealth v. Brown, 538 Pa. 410 , 648 A.2d 1177 (1994) and Commonwealth v. … See, *9 e.g., Commonwealth v. Widmer, 560 Pa. 308 , 744 A.2d 745, 751-52 (2000); Brown, 648 A.2d at 1190 ; Commonwealth v. Karkaria, 533 Pa. 412 , 625 A.2d 1167 , 1170 n. 3 (1993); Commonwealth v.

Miles v. Pennsylvania Coal Co.

245 Pa. 94 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Apr 20, 1914

As far back as Brown v. … It has long been settled in Pennsylvania that a person in possession by a fence as his line for more than twenty-one years, establishes his right to claim title to the line thus *97 marked: Brown v.

In re Anonymous No. 81 D.B. 87

11 Pa. D. & C.4th 393 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Apr 15, 1991

Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Braun, 520 Pa. 157 , 553 A.2d 894 (1989). … Brown and Hill did not participate in the adjudication.

Musselman v. Hatfield Borough

202 Pa. 489 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · May 19, 1902

The court below, being of opinion the case was ruled by Altoona v. Lotz, 114 Pa. 238 , and Haven v. … In Lotz v.

Commonwealth v. Baker

511 Pa. 1 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Jun 23, 1986

Walter Brown went downstairs and a second shot was heard. The second shot hit Walter Brown in the arm. … In Caldwell v.

Commonwealth ex rel. Lehman v. Sutherland

3 Serg. & Rawle 145 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Apr 7, 1817

board of health. … This principle is established by the Supreme Court of Massachusetts, in The Commonwealth v. Fowler, 10 Mass.

Moore v. Taylor

147 Pa. 481 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 7, 1892

On the other hand, if a specific remedy is provided, it must be pursued: Hughes v. Kline, 30 Pa. 227 ; Clinton School District’s Ap., 56 Pa. 315 ; Stewart v. Maple, 70 Pa. 222 ; Van Nort’s Ap., 121 Pa. 118 . … It is contended that the action of the board of revision was illegal. We do not think so. On the contrary, we are of opinion that what was done was within the scope of the general powers delegated to the board.

U.S. Venture Inc, Aplt. v. Dep of Comm & Econo Dev

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Jul 21, 2021

This Court has recognized the Board as a court. In Merchants’ Warehouse Co. v. … We thus consider the Board a “court” pursuant to Article V, Section 1 of the Pennsylvania Constitution. Id.; see also Foley Bros., Inc. v. Commonwealth of Pa.

Upper Providence Township Appeal

414 Pa. 46 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 17, 1964

This Court in an Opinion and Order (Miller v. … Rieder Appeal, 410 Pa. 420 , 188 A. 2d 756 (1963); Brennen v. Zoning Board of Adjustment, 409 Pa. 376 , 187 A. 2d *51 180 (1963).

Hanson's Appeal

330 Pa. 390 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 24, 1938

The prayer of the petition is refused. 1 Bogart v. Woodruff, 96 Cal. 609 ; Pooler v. Hyne, 213 Fed. 154 (cert. denied, 238 U. S. 620 ); Lane v. Duchac, 73 Wis. 646 ; and see Cowley v. Cowley [1901] A. … Thompson v. School Directors, 179 Wis. 284 . 2 Reinhen v. Reinhen, 351 Ill. 409, 413 ; Rich v. Mayer, 7 N. Y. S. 69; Capel v. Powell, 17 C. B. (N. S.) 744, 748, 144 Eng. Rep.-298.

Paving, etc., of Wyoming Street

137 Pa. 494 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Jan 5, 1891

Laws transcending the constitutional limit have been held to be void in many cases, among which are Davis v. Clark, 106 Pa. 377 ; Scowden’s App., 96 Pa. 422 ; Commonwealth v. Patton, 88 Pa. 258 ; Weinman v. … The board makes its award and reports, not to the court that appointed them, but to the city.

Summit Hill School Directors

258 Pa. 575 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Jun 30, 1917

space, for the sum of $290, which contract was approved by the board. … Pittsburgh, 253 Pa. 147 ; Edmundson v. Pittsburgh School District, 248 Pa. 559 . To bold' such requirements directory merely would defeat tbe very object tbe legislature bad in view in inserting them.

S. Bethlehem Assoc. v. ZHB of Bethlehem Twp

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · May 16, 2023

A unanimous panel of the Commonwealth Court “affirm[ed] the [Board’s] decision on different grounds than those of the trial court.” S. Bethlehem Associates, LP v. … Nernberg v. City of Pittsburgh, 620 A.2d 692, 694 n.5 (Pa.

Martin v. Niles-Bement-Pond Co.

214 Pa. 616 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Apr 16, 1906

Justice Brown, The Niles-Bement-Pond Company, a corporation, operated machine shops in the city of Philadelphia. … He then walked along a board about eight inches wide, extending across the joists, until he reached one parallel to and exactly two feet from the shaft at the point where the pulley and collar were located.

Commonwealth v. Collier

213 Pa. 138 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Nov 4, 1905

The members of the board are not designated in the act as comity officers, and, strictly speaking, they could not be so designated. In Taggart v. … V.

Commonwealth v. Bogan

482 Pa. 151 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 5, 1978

The United States Supreme Court in Brown v. … The voluntariness of the statement is, of course, a threshold requirement, Brown v.