Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
10,000+ results
0.72s
Southpointe v. Bd of Sup CT v. ZHB Pet of: Bd of CT
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Nov 23, 2021
: No. 155 WAL 2021 : : v. … : : : v.
Cited 0 timesPublishedGayne v. Philip Carey Manufacturing Co.
385 Pa. 618 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Jun 25, 1956
Lanni v. P.R.R. Co., 371 Pa. 106, 109 , 88 A. 2d 887”: Brusis v. Henkels, 376 Pa. 226, 228 , 102 A. 2d 146 . … “A jury is not permitted, however, to speculate or guess; conjecture, guess or suspicion do not amount to proof”: Lanni v. P.R.R. co., 371 Pa. 106, 110 , 88 A. 2d 887 .
Cited 7 timesPublishedIn Re: Nov 3, 2020 General Election Pet of PA Sec
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 14, 2020
Trump for President, Inc. at al. v. Kathy Boockvar, et al., No. 2:20-cv-00966-NR (W.D. Pa. 2020). … mail-in ballots based solely on signature analysis by the county board of elections.”
Cited 0 timesPublished396 Pa. 283 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Jun 30, 1959
The rule about granting a variance is well stated in Richman v. … See also Triolo v. Exley, 358 Pa. 555 , 57 A. 2d 878 (1948); Borden Appeal, 369 Pa. 517 , 87 A. 2d 465 (1952); Mack Zoning Appeal, 384 Pa. 586 , 122 A. 2d 48 (1956) ; Baronoff v.
Cited 39 timesPublishedWayne Prop. Acq. v. Radnor Twp Bd. of Comm
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Jan 30, 2024
: No. 457 MAL 2023 : : v. … : No. 458 MAL 2023 : : v.
Cited 0 timesPublishedDarien Capital Management, Inc. v. Commonwealth
549 Pa. 1 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Aug 20, 1997
Crawford’s Auto Center, Inc. v. Pennsylvania State Police, 655 A.2d 1064, 1072 (Pa. Commw., (1995), appeal denied, 542 Pa. 651 , 666 A.2d 1059 (1995); Del-Car Automotive v. Pennsylvania State Police, 154 Pa. … Commw. 535, 539 , 624 A.2d 262, 264 (1993); Department of Public Welfare v. Ziegler, 117 Pa. Commw. 79, 82 , 542 A.2d 226, 228 (1988); Department of Public Welfare v. Town Court Nursing Center, Inc., 97 Pa.
Cited 14 timesPublishedNational Wood Preservers, Inc. v. Commonwealth Department of Environmental Resources
489 Pa. 221 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Apr 24, 1980
Hadacheck v. Sebastian, supra at 410, 36 S.Ct. at 145 ; see Miller v. Board of Public Works, 195 Cal. 477, 484 , 234 P. 381, 383 *233 (1925). … Board of Public Utility Comm’n, 254 U.S. 394 , 41 S.Ct. 169 , 65 L.Ed. 322 (1921). In Lawton v.
Cited 56 timesPublished395 Pa. 89 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 16, 1959
We said in Swade v. … Swade v. Springfield Township Zoning Board of Adjustment, supra; Pincus v. Power, 376 Pa. 175 .
Cited 23 timesPublishedNavarro Corp. v. Pittsburgh School District
344 Pa. 429 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 25, 1942
Auth. v. Turner Const. Co., 343 Pa. 512 . … This fact does not detract from his responsibility: State ex rel. v. Bldg. Comm., 124 Ohio St. 413 , 179 N. E. 138 , 125 Ohio St. 301 , 181 N. E. 129 ; New York and Cleveland Gas Coal Co. v. Pittsburgh, 6 D. R. 757.
Cited 9 timesPublished615 Pa. 477 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Apr 26, 2012
However, Deborah Brown’s testimony does not contradict either of these witnesses’ testimony. … Appellant also fails to show Brown was available and willing to testify for him.
Cited 32 timesPublished432 Pa. 158 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Nov 12, 1968
Bendrick v. White, 403 Pa. 55 , 169 A. 2d 69 (1861). See also: Commonwealth ex rel. Harry v. Eastridge, 374 Pa. 172 , 97 A. 2d 350 (1953); Brown v. Brown, 206 Pa. Superior Ct. 439, 444 , 213 A. 2d 395 (1965). … Sage v. Sage, 160 Pa. 399 , 28 A. 863 (1894); Brown v. Brown, 206 Pa. Superior Ct. 439 , 213 A. 2d 385 (1965); Commonwealth ex rel. McKee v. Reitz, 193 Pa. Superior Ct. 125, 130 , 163 A. 2d 908 (1960).
Cited 28 timesPublishedUpper Providence Township Appeal
403 Pa. 50 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 23, 1961
The case of Kotzin v. Plymouth Township Zoning Board of Adjustment, 395 Pa. 125 (1959), 149 A. 2d *53 116 , is precisely in point. … The board refused the application, and the court, on the record developed before the board, reversed and ordered the special exception.
Cited 2 timesPublishedMarcellus Shale Coal. v. Dep't of Envtl. Prot. of Pa.
185 A.3d 985 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Jun 1, 2018
Lee, Inc. v. … See, e.g., Stormans, Inc. v.
Cited 20 timesPublishedCommonwealth Ex Rel. Zimmerman v. Kleiman
485 Pa. 421 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · May 31, 1979
Fox v. … Fox v. Chace, 403 *430 Pa. at 120, 168 A.2d at 571 , citing Commonwealth v. Mayor of Lancaster, 5 Watts 152 (1836).
Cited 3 timesPublished334 Pa. 538 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · May 8, 1939
If the legislature had intended teachers to be employed or retained who are rendered unnecessary by the abolition of a department (Ehret v. … L. 1019, section 52(5). 4 Ehret v.
Cited 14 timesPublishedWilson v. Pittsburg & Lake Erie Railroad
222 Pa. 541 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Jan 4, 1909
Nor do we agree that the determination by the board of the amount of land necessary for the purpose intended is conclusive and binding on the landowner. … The case of Wilson v. Pittsburg & Lake Erie R. R. Co., 34 Pa.
Cited 11 timesPublishedOffice of Disciplinary Counsel v. Holston
533 Pa. 78 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Jan 25, 1993
Disciplinary Counsel v. Shorall, 527 Pa. 413 , 592 A.2d 1285 (1991); Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Stern, 515 Pa. 68 , 526 A.2d 1180 (1987); Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. … In Office of Disciplinary Counsel v.
Cited 27 timesPublished504 Pa. 304 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 15, 1984
On that date the Board of Commissioners of the Township (hereafter Board) passed a resolution nominating him for the position of chief of police. … In Gardner v.
Cited 20 timesPublishedOffice of Disciplinary Counsel v. Goldman
78 Pa. D. & C.4th 538 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · May 20, 2005
Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Levande, No. 658 Disciplinary Docket no. 3, (Pa. April 2, 2001). The board noted that Mr. … Board Members McLaughlin, Brown, Pietragallo and Nordenberg did not participate in the March 16, 2005 adjudication.
Cited 0 timesPublished43 Pa. 107 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Jun 26, 1862
For the boarding and necessaries furnished to a parent, the law implies no promise to pay. But this is an exceptional case. It springs from the intimate relationship of the parties: Lynn v. Lynn, 5 Casey 369. … He said he would not board at any place but the plaintiff’s — that he had enough to pay for his boarding. The tendency of this is to show that gratuitous service was not expected.
Cited 10 timesPublished
Ask Donna