Case law

Black Pol. Emp. v. Schmidt, A.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Sep 13, 2024

Wilson v. Com., Dept. of Comm. and Econ. … .’”); Sprague v. Casey, 550 A.2d 184, 189 (Pa. 1988) (“[U]nless all indispensable parties are made parties to an action, a court is powerless to grant relief. . . .

Stradley v. Bath Portland Cement Co.

228 Pa. 108 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Apr 25, 1910

In Orr v. Mercer County Mut. … Justice Fell in Schwan v.

Albert v. Lehigh Coal & Navigation Co.

431 Pa. 600 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 3, 1968

Lehigh’s claim of title is based upon the 1867 deed of Brown to Lehigh. … See also: Montgomery v. Meredith, 17 Pa. 42 (1851); Brown v. Hays, 66 Pa. 229 (1871); Nypen Corp. v. Sechrist, 138 Pa. Superior Ct. 361, 364 , 10 A. 2d 822 (1940); Bozitsko v.

High v. COM., UNEMPLOY. COMP. BD. OF REV.

505 Pa. 379 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Aug 8, 1984

See: Unemployment Compensation Board of Review v. Sun Oil Company, 476 Pa. 589 , 383 A.2d 519 (1978); Philco Corporation v. Unemployment Compensation Board of Review, 430 Pa. 101 , 242 A.2d 454 (1968). … See also: School District of The City of Erie v. Unemployment Compensation Board of Review, 48 Pa.Cmwlth. 460 , 409 A.2d 982 (1980); Unemployment Compensation Board of Review v.

ODC v. Lokanath, M.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Jul 3, 2019

OFFICE OF DISCIPLINARY COUNSEL, : No. 2622 Disciplinary Docket No. 3 : Petitioner : No. 73 DB 2019 : v … Respondent shall comply with all the provisions of Pa.R.D.E. 217 and pay costs to the Disciplinary Board pursuant to Pa.R.D.E. 208(g).

Commonwealth ex rel. District Attorney v. Jackson

248 Pa. 530 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 15, 1915

The word “shall” in the clause “matter or action that shall come before the board” when construed in connection with the context does not necessarily mean that the matter must have been before the board before the offense … charged in the indictment, it has the same effect as a plea of guilty, so far as the indictment is concerned, and when judgment has been entered on’the plea the record is competent evidence of the fact of conviction, Buck v.

Whitney v. City of Pittsburgh

138 Pa. 401 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 16, 1891

Something like this was done in Shurley v. Railroad Co., 121 Pa. 511 . … This was distinctly ruled in the recent case of Allegheny City v. Railroad Co., ante 375.

ODC v. Amanda Iannuzzelli

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Jul 1, 2019

OFFICE OF DISCIPLINARY COUNSEL, : No. 2603 Disciplinary Docket No. 3 : Petitioner : No. 196 DB 2017 : v … Respondent shall pay costs to the Disciplinary Board pursuant to Pa.R.D.E. 208(g).

Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. McDaniel

74 Pa. D. & C.4th 122 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Feb 22, 2005

Accordingly, the issue before the board is the appropriate level of discipline. … The board is persuaded that a suspension of one year and one day is warranted. V.

ODC v. Joseph Q. Mirarchi

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 18, 2019

. 3 : Petitioner : No. 56 DB 2016 : : Attorney Registration No. 90137 v … Respondent shall pay costs to the Disciplinary Board pursuant to Pa.R.D.E. 208(g).

Commonwealth ex rel. Attorney General v. Snyder

279 Pa. 234 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Jan 21, 1924

In Minsinger v. … vital in character and it is apparent that without them the lawmakers would not have enacted the legislation”; and the same principle applies where, for any reason, parts of an act are found unconstitutional: Rothermel v.

Daimlerchrysler Corp. v. Commonwealth

592 Pa. 612 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Jun 25, 2007

See, e.g., Burger v. Board of School Directors of McGuffey School District, 576 Pa. 574, 586 , 839 A.2d 1055, 1062 (2003). … McKesson Corporation v.

Matter of Rosenbaum

478 Pa. 93 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Apr 28, 1978

Charges IV and V referred to by the Special Disciplinary Court were two charges contained in one paragraph of the Petition. … However, the Board made a further finding that Krehel had a personal bias and animosity against Ryan and concluded that Krehel should be disciplined for failing to disqualify himself as a member of the board of arbitration

A. & S. Wilson Co. v. Reighard

230 Pa. 141 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Jan 3, 1911

At common law there was not a variance where an express promise, not under seal, and fully performed was proved under a declaration in indebitatus assumpsit: Kelly v. Foster, 2 Binney, 4; Harris v. … . & S. 301 ; Eckel v. Murphey, 15 Pa. 488 ; Brown v. Foster, 51 Pa. 165 .

ODC v. Ryan D. Breen

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Nov 9, 2020

OFFICE OF DISCIPLINARY COUNSEL, : No. 2757 Disciplinary Docket No. 3 : Petitioner : No. 134 DB 2020 : v … Respondent shall comply with all the provisions of Pa.R.D.E. 217 and pay costs to the Disciplinary Board. See Pa.R.D.E. 208(g).

ODC v. Scott Lawrence Kramer

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Jul 30, 2019

OFFICE OF DISCIPLINARY COUNSEL, : No. 2591 Disciplinary Docket No. 3 : Petitioner : No. 127 DB 2017 : v … Respondent shall pay costs to the Disciplinary Board pursuant to Pa.R.D.E. 208(g). .

ODC v. Lenard Fredrick Collett

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Jun 7, 2019

OFFICE OF DISCIPLINARY COUNSEL, : No. 2605 Disciplinary Docket No. 3 : Petitioner : No. 68 DB 2019 : v … Respondent shall pay costs to the Disciplinary Board pursuant to Pa.R.D.E. 208(g).

ODC v. Keith Michael McWhirk

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Jul 31, 2020

OFFICE OF DISCIPLINARY COUNSEL, : No. 2247 Disciplinary Docket No. 3 : Petitioner : No. 28 DB 2016 : v … Respondent shall comply with all the provisions of Pa.R.D.E. 217 and pay costs to the Disciplinary Board. See Pa.R.D.E. 208(g).

Sears's Estate

313 Pa. 415 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Dec 7, 1933

S. v. Searcey (U. … Co. v. Riefler, 239 U.

In the Matter of: Patrick Joseph Bradley

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Jul 28, 2016

OF DISCIPLINARY COUNSEL, : No. 2189 Disciplinary Docket No. 3 : Petitioner : No. 107 DB 2015 : v … Petitioner’s request for an imposition of a daily fine is denied without prejudice to seek such relief in terms of the Board’s recommendation.