Case law

Hopkins v. West Jersey & Seashore Railroad

225 Pa. 193 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Jun 22, 1909

place for passengers is inside the car; that unless he shows some valid reason .to excuse, a passenger is bound to put himself in the appointed place, and if he does not, he takes the risk of his location elsewhere: Thane v. … He admits that when he boarded the boat he could at once have entered either passenger way to the right or left.

Speight v. Burens

371 Pa. Super. 478 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Feb 19, 1988

Investors Diversified Services v. Workmen’s Compensation Appeal Board, 103 Pa.Commw. 562, 566, 520 A.2d 958, 960 (1987). In Port Authority of Allegheny County v. … Hess, Inc. v. Workmen’s Compensation Appeal Board, 17 Pa.

Williams v. Hazlep

14 Pa. 157 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Sep 15, 1850

It has been long settled that if the appellant pay the costs taxed by the prothonotary, the court will not strike off the appeal, although there afterwards appear to be more costs due: McKeown v. … Boudinot, 1 Brown 150 ; Fraley v. Nelson, 5 Ser. & R. 284; Stewart v. Jewell, 11 Ser. & R. 359.

Dana v. Bank of the United States

5 Watts & Serg. 223 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 15, 1843

Salem Bank v. Gloster Bank, ( 17 Mass. 29 , 30); Lincoln and Kennebec Bridge v. Richardson, (1 Greenleaf 81). … And in the State of Maryland v.

Commonwealth v. Simanowicz

242 Pa. 402 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Nov 7, 1913

That this measure of proof is not required when insanity is set up as a substantive defense on the trial of the main issue has been held in a long line of our cases which are reviewed by our Brother Brown in Com. v. … “In a criminal case there is no warrant of attorney, actual or potential”: Prine v. Com., 18 Pa. 103 .

Dopkin v. Philadelphia & Reading Coal & Iron Co.

296 Pa. 71 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Feb 11, 1929

This finding was approved by the board, and, on appeal, by the court below. In Kelly v. … Again, in Farran v. Curtis Pub.

Fleming v. Dixon

194 Pa. 67 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Dec 30, 1899

Justice Brown, This appeal is utterly without merit. But a single question, purely of fact, was involved in the trial of the cause in the court below. … Patterson v. Kountz, 63 Pa. 246 ; Winsor v. Maddock, 64 Pa. 231 . The judgment is affirmed.

Beattie v. Allegheny County

589 Pa. 113 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 11, 2006

Id. at 189 (citing Borough of Green Tree v. Board of Prop. Assessments, Appeals & Review of Allegheny County, 459 Pa. 268 , 328 A.2d 819 (1974)). … Board of Prop. Assessment, Appeals & Review of Allegheny County, 417 Pa. 213 , 209 A.2d 397 (1965), and McKnight Shopping Ctr. v. Board of Prop.

Palmer Township Annexation Case

416 Pa. 163 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Nov 24, 1964

The board was appointed, held hearings and made a factual report to the court. … Kaufman Construction Company v. Holcomb, 357 Pa. 514 , 55 A. 2d 534 (1947); Chartiers Township Appeal, supra.

Shay v. Schrink

335 Pa. 94 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Apr 11, 1939

v. … v.

Richter v. Penn Township

9 Pa. 79 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Aug 4, 1848

The executors insisted that their testator’s account could only be examined for tbe last year, and relied on the case of Leasure v. Mahoning Township, 8 Watts, *80 551 . … The act of 1836, being referred to, requires that all orders upon the treasurer of the common-school fund, shall be signed by the president of the board of school directors, and attested by the secretary of the board.

Commonwealth v. Jones

487 Pa. 183 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Dec 21, 1979

Commonwealth v. Brown, 467 Pa. 512 , 359 A.2d 393 (1976). Jones argues the trial court abused its discretion in allowing the prosecutor to ask certain leading questions of his own witnesses. … See Commonwealth v. Gockley, 411 Pa. 437 , 192 A.2d 693 (1963).

Cadles of Grassy Meadows, II, LLC v. Bet Shavei-Tzion

639 Pa. 345 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 31, 2016

Hamilton v. Moore

335 Pa. 433 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · May 8, 1939

Shelback, 1 Dall. 165 ; Brown v. Downing, 137 Pa. 569 ; Mitchell v. Spaulding, 206 Pa. 220 ; Ohlweiler v. Ohlweiler, 72 Pa. Superior Ct. 518 . … In Brown v. Downing, supra, and in Mitchell v.

Houlehan v. Pullman Co.

280 Pa. 402 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · May 12, 1924

The referee and compensation board found he was and allowed compensation; this the court of common pleas reversed and remanded the case for further hearing. … In Haddock v. Edgewater Steel Co. et al., 263 Pa. 120 , also in Messer v. Manufacturers’ L. & H.

Bungar v. St. Michael's Greek Catholic Church

272 Pa. 402 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Jan 3, 1922

J ohn Bungar, plaintiff in the judgment, was president of the board of trustees of St. … There has been other litigation involving the affairs, of this church, which was disposed of by us, in the case of Chrapko v. Kobasa, 271 Pa. 447 . That was a bill in equity filed by certain members of the congregation.

City of Scranton v. Whyte

148 Pa. 419 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Apr 11, 1892

If such laws relate to other *426 subjects not within the purposes of classification, they fall within the prohibition and are void: Scowden’s Ap., 96 Pa. 425 ; Davis v. Clark, 106 Pa. 377 ; M’Carthy v. … The statute under consideration in that case fell, because the board of viewers, with its powers and functions, was indispensable to the system provided by it, and the provisions relating to the board were unconstitutional

First Pennsylvania Bank, N.A. v. Lancaster County Tax Claim Bureau

504 Pa. 179 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Dec 30, 1983

v. … Mennonite Board, 462 U.S. at —, 103 S.Ct. at 2712 (emphasis added). Nevertheless, the decision in Mennonite Board unquestionably controls the instant case.

Garbev Zoning Case

385 Pa. 328 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · May 21, 1956

The Board of Adjustment denied the appeal. … Power, 376 Pa. 175 , 101 A. 2d 914 ; Silverco, Inc. v. Zoning Board of Adjustment, 379 Pa. 497 , 109 A. 2d 147 . In Silverco, Inc. v.

Smith v. Lathrop

44 Pa. 326 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Feb 26, 1863

Brown, 2 Curtis 559. The most ample and learned discussion of the question is to be found in Hatch v. Spafford, 22 Conn. 485 , where all the cases are reviewed, and the court unanimously arrived at the same conclusion. … In Irvine v. Lumbermen’s Bank, Id. 208 , Justice Rogers makes a qusere upon the principle of comity, which is clearly not applicable to Now York; and in Ralph v. Brown, 3 W. & S. 399 , Gibson, C.