Case law

Commonwealth v. Van Horn

188 Pa. 143 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 17, 1898

As this was precisely what he did do in a most inhuman and barbarous manner’, the charge of premeditation must be regarded as having been established by testimony of the most conclusive character. … The juror Owens qualified himself clearly by his answers to questions.

Johnson v. Brinker

326 Pa. Super. 464 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Apr 13, 1984

his non-paternity by requesting that the court: *466 (1) Appoint experts qualified as examiners of blood types; (2) Order and Direct [appellee, the child and appellant], to submit to various blood grouping tests before these … Their reliability as an indicator of the truth has been fully established.

Fidelity-Philadelphia Trust Co. v. Hines

337 Pa. 48 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Dec 7, 1939

L. 624, section 1001(11), empowers state banks and trust companies to become members of a Federal Reserve Bank, and (section 1019) for that purpose to purchase and hold the necessary qualifying stock, and to acquire and exercise … While, of course, it is permissible for the State to prescribe such an interest charge in case of default after the proper interpretation of the act has been judicially established, harsh penalties or unusual interest rates

Corabi v. Curtis Publishing Co.

441 Pa. 432 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Jan 25, 1971

conduct. 9 If it has relatively less weight from a social point of view, the immunity may be qualified, and conditioned upon good motives and reasonable behavior:” Prosser, The Law of Torts §109, at 796 (3d ed. 1964). … pieced together from the original manuscript of Aronowitz in such a manner as to be clearly defamatory.”

Hill v. Truby

117 Pa. 320 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 24, 1887

It is true the act in terms qualified the witness to testify to matters having occurred between the surviving party and the adverse party on the record, but that was because it was that class of matters which were specially … The offer must itself disclose all the facts which are necessary to establish its admissibility and this is not done by the offer in question.

Taylor v. Kelly

80 Pa. 95 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Nov 22, 1875

Their competency is sought to be established by the first section of that act. … When the legislature sought to qualify this statute, as they did by the 1st sect, of the Act of 9th April 1870, they restricted the right .of a party to testify to matters only which occurred after the death of the person

Commonwealth Ex Rel. White v. Miller

313 Pa. 140 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Sep 28, 1933

the Act of 1907 contravenes section 3 of article III of the Constitution of Pennsylvania which provides that “no bill, except general appropriation bills, shall be passed containing more than one subject, which shall be clearly … This is the rule established by all our cases. It is an application of the maxim expressio unius exclusio alterius.

Chase v. Miller

41 Pa. 403 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · May 22, 1862

If, then, we have an established exception, additional to the one exception stated by the chief justice in Gorsline v. … Neither unconstitutionality nor repugnancy are to be assumed, but, if both clearly appear, we ought not to be expected to give the section effect.

Appeal of Fidelity Insurance Trust & Safe Deposit Co.

108 Pa. 492 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 5, 1885

August, 1883; if it be read as so written the eighty-one shares of the Provident Life and Trust Company of Philadelphia, of the par value of $100 per share, at that time standing in her name on the books of the company, are clearly … Other cases are cited, not strictly applicable to the question under *502 consideration; in some of them the qualifying word “now” serves merely as a description of the subject matter of a bequest, as In re Midland R.

In Re Stout

521 Pa. 571 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · May 18, 1989

Even our decisional law, at times, takes on a rulemaking quality, as when we abrogated the common-law rule of sovereign immunity, ( Mayle v. … Sections 15 and 16 are clearly intended to be complementary. Firing v.

Commonwealth v. Long

592 Pa. 42 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · May 31, 2007

Consequently, the right of access is only a “qualified right.” … Clearly, the court was motivated by a concern for the jurors’ privacy.

Commonwealth v. McCloud

457 Pa. 310 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Jul 29, 1974

Frequently, the cause of death is seriously in issue and the subject of conflicting opinion by qualified physicians. See, e.g., Commonwealth v. Hudson, 455 Pa. 117 , 314 A.2d 231 (1974). … Its failure to do so clearly was error of constitutional dimension. The Commonwealth, urges, however, that on this record, we should view the error as harmless. This argument is meritless.

Powell v. Drumheller

653 A.2d 619 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Jan 23, 1995

In Jones , we held: Proximate cause is a term of art, and may be established by evidence that a defendant’s negligent act or failure to act was a substantial factor in bringing about the harm inflicted upon a plaintiff. … As an initial matter, it should be noted that Dickens was concerned with immunity under the particular language of our governmental immunity statute, rather than our sovereign immunity statute.

Commonwealth v. Cotto

562 Pa. 32 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Jun 20, 2000

Juvenile courts were first established in this Commonwealth by the Act of May 21, 1901, P.L. 279. 5 . … First, he argues that the statute suffers from a "due process infirmity” because it does not immunize any testimony given by a juvenile at the transfer hearing.

Robinson Protective Alarm Co. v. Bolger & Picker

512 Pa. 116 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 3, 1986

We note, however, that it has been firmly established that the right to amend a pleading is a matter of judicial discretion and should be liberally granted at any stage of a proceeding unless it constitutes surprise which … This argument is clearly without merit where the bank paid out to an authorized payee.

Patrick Media Group, Inc. v. Commonwealth

533 Pa. 188 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Feb 19, 1993

established by law as industrial or commercial. 36 P.S. § 2718.104 (emphasis added). … Nevertheless, it is clear that under the definition of the term “municipality” set forth in the Statutory Construction Act of 1972, a township does not qualify as a municipality for purposes of the OAC Act.

Commonwealth v. Johnson

520 Pa. 165 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Jan 27, 1989

. * * * * * * The principle embodied in the Statutory Construction Act, that the legislature must clearly manifest an intent to apply an act retroactively, is also recognized in case law. … The state makes no contract with criminals, at the time of the passage of an act of limitation, that they shall have immunity from punishment if not prosecuted within the statutory period.

Wagner v. Estate of Rummel

391 Pa. Super. 555 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Feb 20, 1990

Agnes Wells was not the owner of the property, nor does the record show that she possessed any attributes which would qualify her as an expert on real estate valuation. … It is also not yet as clearly defined as these traditional defenses, (citations omitted)."

Vicari v. Spiegel

605 Pa. 381 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 25, 2010

Blum’s testimony because, under the MOARE Act, he allegedly did not qualify as an expert witness as to standard of care. Vicari v. … That is clearly not the case.

Crumley v. Lutz

180 Pa. 476 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 29, 1897

This rule is in full force in Pennsylvania, except so far as it may have been qualified by statute: McCredy v. Fey, 7 Watts, 496 . … It requires two verdicts and judgments thereon for or against his claim to finally establish or defeat it.