Case law

STB Investments v. Harmon, A.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Jul 22, 2015

HIGGINS ARCHITECT, INC., : : Petitioners : : : v. … THE ESTATE : OF JUANITA HARMON, NADINE WHITE, : LINDA BELL, BERNARD DITOMO, : JENNIFER REYNOLDS, FELICIA HILL, : ROSEMARY KREUTZBERG, RODNEY : GEDDIS, SHIRLEY BALL AND STANLEY : BALL, H/W, BETTY BROWN

Eastern Univ. Acad. C.S., Aplt. v. S.D. of Phila.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Dec 22, 2021

Relatedly, the Board found that Eastern’s proposed construction of Section 1729-A(a) disregarded the Commonwealth Court’s observation in Community Academy of Philadelphia Charter School v. … (citing Madara v. Commonwealth, 323 A.2d 401, 403 (Pa.

Edmonds v. First National Bank

215 Pa. 547 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · May 24, 1906

v. … Brooks, 25 Pa. 210 ; Carey v. Bright, 58 Pa. 70 . The judgment is affirmed.

In the Matter of: Jean Paulson Tuffet

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · May 2, 2019

OFFICE OF DISCIPLINARY COUNSEL, : No. 2381 Disciplinary Docket No. 3 : Petitioner : No. 74 DB 2017 : v … Respondent shall comply with all of the provisions of Pa.R.D.E. 217 and pay costs to the Disciplinary Board pursuant to Pa.R.D.E. 208(g).

Borland's Appeal

234 Pa. 280 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Jan 2, 1912

Dreisbach, 2 Rawle, 287 ; Priestley’s Appeal, 127 Pa. 420 ; Ferguson v. Yard, 164 Pa. 586 . … Other cases recognizing this rule are Hamilton v. Hamilton’s Executors, 18 Pa. 20 ; Guldin v. Lorah, 141 Pa. 109 ; Garretson v. Brown, 185 Pa. 447 . Appeal dismissed at the costs of appellants,

Hall v. Freaney

345 Pa. 45 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · May 11, 1942

That is while you were standing on the running board? A. Yes. Q. Then what did you do? A. Just closed the door and stood waiting for them to go through? Q. Stood on the rumving board? A. No. … The trial court should have granted defendant’s motion for judgment n. o. v. because plaintiff was guilty of contributory negligence.

Amendment of Iolta Board Regulations

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Aug 7, 2017

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA IN RE: : NO. 153 : AMENDMENT OF IOLTA BOARD : DISCIPLINARY … : : ORDER PER CURIAM AND NOW, this 7th day of August, 2017, it is ORDERED pursuant to Article V,

ODC v. Daniel Joseph D'Antonio

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 1, 2018

OF DISCIPLINARY COUNSEL, : No. 2448 Disciplinary Docket No. 3 : Petitioner : No. 177 DB 2017 : v … Respondent shall pay the costs incurred by the Disciplinary Board in the investigation and prosecution of this matter.

Muncy Borough School District v. Commonwealth ex rel. Witter

84 Pa. 464 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Jun 11, 1877

A delay caused solely by the neglect of a post-office official will be excused: Schofield v. Bayard, 3 Wend. 488 ; Allen v. Suydam, 20 Id. 321. In the National Newark Banking Company v. … The board had nothing to do with receiving or handling the money.

ODC, Pet v. Malcolm P. Rosenberg

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 17, 2016

THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA OFFICE OF DISCIPLINARY COUNSEL, : No. 2241 Disciplinary Docket No. 3 Petitioner : : No. 156 DB 2014 v … Respondent shall pay costs to the Disciplinary Board pursuant to Pa.R.D.E. 208(g).

Pennsylyania Life Insurance v. Pennsylvania National Life Insurance

417 Pa. 168 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 16, 1965

The Water Company had filed an application with the Water and Power Resources Board (Board) to increase its water allocation from the creek. … Relying on Consolidated Home Specialties Co. v.

Hack v. Hack

495 Pa. 300 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Jul 14, 1981

Ayala v. Philadelphia Board of Public Education, 453 Pa. 584, 594 , 305 A.2d 877, 882 (1973). See also Mayle v. Pennsylvania Dep’t of Highways, 479 Pa. 384 , 388 A.2d 709 (1978); Falco v. … Shook v. Crabb, 281 N.W.2d 616 (Iowa 1979); Brown v. Brown,-Mass.-, 409 N.E.2d 717 (1980); MacDonald v. MacDonald, 412 A.2d 71 (Me. 1980); Imig v. March, 203 Neb. 537 , 279 N.W.2d 382 (1979).

Watts, T. v. Manheim Twp. School District, Aplt.

632 Pa. 583 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Aug 26, 2015

applicable] to mean that school boards retain the ability to exercise their discretion in determining what constitutes ‘proper transportation.’ ” School District’s Brief at 32 (citing Martin v. … Chipman v. Avon Grove Sch.

Bible v. Commonwealth, Department of Labor & Industry

696 A.2d 1149 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Jun 13, 1997

In Workmen’s Compensation Appeal Board v. … Pennsylvania Labor Relations Board v. Zelem, 459 Pa. 399 , 329 A.2d 477 (1974).

Abington Heights SD v. PLRB Pet of: AH Educ Assoc

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 27, 2022

MIDDLE DISTRICT ABINGTON HEIGHTS SCHOOL DISTRICT : No. 126 MAL 2022 : : v … Allowance of Appeal : from the Order of the : Commonwealth Court PENNSYLVANIA LABOR RELATIONS : BOARD

Commonwealth v. Heidelberg Township

984 A.2d 477 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Nov 10, 2009

See Commonwealth, Office of the Attorney General v.

Dorman v. Turnpike Co.

3 Watts 126 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Sep 15, 1834

In the Turnpike Company v. Brown, 2 Penns.

Stebbins v. County of Crawford

92 Pa. 289 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Jan 5, 1879

In Anspach v. Brown, 7 Warts 140, it is admitted that there is an obligation in morals, to pay a debt barred by a judgment, which will support an express promise to that effect.

Clemson v. Davidson

4 Binn. 405 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 28, 1812

But even in strictness I do not insist upon it, though the language of the books, recognized by a dictum of Lord Loughborough, in Lickbarrow v. … Iliad, 23 v. 725.

Akers v. Hite

94 Pa. 394 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · May 31, 1880

Co. v. Masonheimer, 26 P. F. Smith 138; Wilson v. Trumbull Ins. Co., 7 Harris 372. … Co., v. Snyder, 4 N. Y. 387 .