Case law

Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Diangelus

589 Pa. 1 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Sep 27, 2006

In addition, while our review is de novo, the findings of the Hearing Committee and the Disciplinary Board are “guidelines for judging the credibility of witnesses,” Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. … Discipline The Hearing Committee and the Board correctly viewed the dishonesty of DiAngelus to ADA Stollsteimer as deceit to the court, and therefore cited Office of Disciplinary Counsel v.

White v. Moore

288 Pa. 411 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Jan 11, 1927

Thus in Provident Life & Trust Co. v. … Griffin, 140 Pa. 604 ; Jaffray v. Frothingham, 148 Pa. 213 ; Krepps v. Carlisle, 157 Pa. 358 ; Halfman v. Penna. Boiler Ins. Co., 160 Pa. 202 .” And in Sikorski v. Phila. & Reading R. R.

ODC v. William J. Weiss

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · May 2, 2024

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA OFFICE OF DISCIPLINARY COUNSEL, : No. 2873 Disciplinary Docket No. 3 Petitioner No. 133 DB 2021 V. … Respondent shall comply with the provisions of Pa.R.D.E. 217 and pay costs to the Disciplinary Board. See Pa.R.D.E. 208(g).

Commonwealth v. Edwards

535 Pa. 575 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Dec 30, 1993

Finally, Mary Brown and her mother, victim Mary Edwards, left the house with Appellant’s words, “I will take care of you when you get home,” ringing in their ears. … See, Russell v.

Mooney v. Lehigh Valley Railroad

261 Pa. 339 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · May 6, 1918

(2) “Was the grant of a hearing de novo as aforesaid merely an interlocutory order of the board, from which there could be no appeal?” … In McCauley v.

In Re: Amendments of the Pennsylvania Rules of Professional Conduct and the Pennsylvania Rules of Disciplinary Enforcement

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Dec 30, 2014

If the response to the rule to show cause raises issues of fact, the [Chairman of the] Board Chair may direct that a hearing be held before a member of the Board who shall submit a report to the Board upon the … (v) Every business operating account maintained or utilized by the attorney in the practice of law during the same time period specified in subparagraph (iii).

Local 22, Philadelphia Fire Fighters' Union v. Commonwealth

531 Pa. 334 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Jun 17, 1992

In Snider v. … In Spykerman v.

Babcock School District v. Potocki

502 Pa. 349 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 19, 1983

Roberts v. … Babcock v. Potocki, 71 Pa. Cmwlth. 504, 508, 455 A.2d 273, 275 (1983) (footnotes omitted).

Tallarico v. Autenreith (Kerr)

347 Pa. 170 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 23, 1943

Superior Ct. 462 ; Gable v. Golder, 116 Pa. … Willard, 57 Pa. 374 ; Silveus v. Grossman, 307 Pa. 272 , 161 A. 362 . What then are the facts adduced by plaintiff to show that Kerr was in exclusive control of the board either by himself or through agents or employes?

Benchoff v. Corbett

586 Pa. 266 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Feb 21, 2006

Commonwealth v. Nicely

536 Pa. 144 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 14, 1994

(b) The Pennsylvania Board of Probation and Parole shall impose, as a condition of supervision, a monthly supervision fee of at least twenty-five dollars ($25) on any offender under the board’s supervision, unless the board … conditions as if the court or board had imposed it, unless the court or *149 board makes a finding that the offender is presently unable to pay. 71 P.S. § 180-7.20(a)-(c).

Appeal of Lusk

108 Pa. 152 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Jan 5, 1885

In the somewhat analogous cases of Hare v. … The rule is thus .laid down in the recent ease of Christy v.

In Re: Omnibus Amendments to the Regulations of the Pennsylvania Judicial Ethics Advisory Board

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Feb 28, 2024

: : ORDER PER CURIAM AND NOW, this 28th day of February, 2024, pursuant to Article V, … Section 10 of the Constitution of Pennsylvania, IT IS ORDERED that: The Regulations of the Pennsylvania Judicial Ethics Advisory Board are amended in the attached form.

ODC v. Shelley L. Fant

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Apr 10, 2024

: No. 3038 Disciplinary Docket No. 3 : Petitioner : No. 78 DB 2023 : v … Respondent shall comply with the provisions of Pa.R.D.E. 217 and pay costs to the Disciplinary Board. See Pa.R.D.E. 208(g).

Beth. Area S.C. v. Bd. of Rev. Appeal of NH Cty

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Aug 12, 2020

PENNSYLVANIA MIDDLE DISTRICT BETHLEHEM AREA SCHOOL DISTRICT : No. 66 MAL 2020 : : v … : Petition for Allowance of Appeal : from the Order of the : Commonwealth Court THE BOARD OF REVENUE

Rosario, R., Aplt v. PA Dept of Corrections

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Jun 18, 2024

v. : : : SUPERINTENDENT KEVIN J. … .; BOARD'S SECRETARY : DEBORAH L.

Palmer's Appeal

307 Pa. 426 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Jan 6, 1932

Co. v. Pittsburgh, 226 Pa. 322, 331 ; Valley Rys. v. Harrisburg, 280 Pa. 385, 395 ; Worcester v. Street Ry. Co., 196 U. S. 539, 548 ; Trenton v. New Jersey, 262 U. … Com., 29 Pa. 129 ; Campell v. Com., 96 Pa. 344 , and Coyle v. Com. 104 Pa. 117 .

Suburban Realty LP. v. Stroud Twp ZHB

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 15, 2021

: Petitioner : : Petition for Allowance of Appeal : from the Order of the v … : BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, : : Respondents : ORDER PER CURIAM AND NOW, this 15th

ODC v. Michael John Csonka

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Nov 9, 2023

DISCIPLINARY : No. 3009 Disciplinary Docket No. 3 COUNSEL, : Petitioner : : No. 89 DB 2023 v … Respondent shall comply with the provisions of Pa.R.D.E. 217 and pay costs to the Disciplinary Board. See Pa.R.D.E. 208(g).

Poor District Case (No. 1)

329 Pa. 390 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Jan 4, 1938

These acts abolish more than four hundred twenty-five poor boards, sixty-seven County Mothers’ Assistance Boards and the State Emergency Relief Board with its subsidiary boards in all parts of the state. * In *396 place of … The constitutional provision is a “limitation on the power of the legislature to delegate to a nonelective board or commission the power to tax” (Wilson v. School District, supra).