Case law

Citizens' National Bank v. Marks

34 Pa. Super. 310 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 7, 1907

Under these circumstances a plea of accord and satisfaction could not be sustained: Dunn v. B. & L. Assn., 2 Penny. 109 ; Keen v. Vaughan, 48 Pa. 477 . … The mere fact that Hays was one of the board of directors does not, in and of itself, amount to such proof : Cook on Stockholders, 712 ; Turnpike Co. v. Craver, 45 Pa. 386 .

Haven v. Pittsburgh & Allegheny Bridge Co.

151 Pa. 620 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Nov 11, 1892

Thus in Forks Township v. … In Hill v.

Criswell v. Clugh

3 Watts 330 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Sep 15, 1834

In Brown v. The Commonwealth, 3 Serg. & Rawle 273 , this act received a similar construction.

Pierce Et Vir v. D. L. W. R. R. Co.

358 Pa. 403 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Jan 6, 1948

The evidence is that when she boarded the train at Binghamton she was assisted by the trainman at the car which she boarded and by a soldier. * She did not *Page 406 advise the trainman who put her valise "right at the top … If she required assistance, she should have informed a trainman of the need before reaching her destination: compare Baron v. Wilkes-Barre Co. , 71 Pa. Super. 103 ; Low v. Harrisburg Rwy.

Grace Methodist Episcopal Church v. Dobbins

153 Pa. 294 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Feb 20, 1893

The rule is stated in Gale on Easements half a century ago, quoted with approbation by Chief Justice Gibson, in Seibert v. Levan, 8 Pa. 383 ; by Chief Justice Lewis, in Kieffer v. … See Suffield v. Brown, 4 De G. J. & S. 185, and the comments on it in Goddard’s Law of Easements, Bennett’s ed. 118. How far the question of necessity enters into the creation of such an easement we need not discuss.

Commonwealth v. Ransome

485 Pa. 490 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Jul 6, 1979

In Commonwealth v. Brown, 462 Pa. 578 , 342 A.2d 84 (1975), this Court was presented with a similar claim of an uncounselled identification in violation of the Richman rule. … Commonwealth v. Brown, 462 Pa. at 589 , 342 A.2d at 90 . We have earlier evaluated the trial identification by Parsons under the totality of the circumstances test in determining that the identification was reliable.

Simkins v. Philadelphia Rapid Transit Co.

244 Pa. 182 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Feb 16, 1914

The best expression of the law as applied to the facts of the present case may be found in Bumbear v. Traction Co., 198 Pa. 198 . … In all of its essential features this case is ruled by Bumbear v. Traction Company above cited. The two cases cannot be distinguished in principle.

Pearlstein, J. & K., Aplts. v. Commonwealth

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Sep 26, 2024

The Commonwealth Court, reviewing the matter de novo, 12 affirmed the Board’s decisions. Pearlstein v. Commonwealth, 267 A.3d 593, 593 (Pa. … The court affirmed the Board’s decisions with regard to Reed and Gail Slogoff, and Robert and Cynthia Pearlstein based on the reasoning in the Pearlstein I. See Pearlstein v. Commonwealth, 2021 WL 5707121, *1 (Pa.

Seibert v. Levan

8 Pa. 383 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · May 15, 1848

Because, as appears in Jordan v. … Chamberlain, and Lady Brown’s case, in which the easement was not lost though the water was conveyed through leaden pipes.

Schuldt v. Reading Trust Co.

292 Pa. 327 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Jan 23, 1928

Woomer has died since the trial of this case, and the devisees under her will, Thomas Woodward Brown, Edna Josephine Gery, Raymond E. Brown, and Mildred E. … In Schuldt v.

Hamilton v. Procon, Inc.

434 Pa. 90 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Apr 23, 1969

See also: Lorigan v. W. O. Gulbranson, Inc., 184 Pa. Superior Ct. 251, 255 , 132 A. 2d 695 (1957); Garver v. B. K. Elliott Co., 155 Pa. Superior Ct. 511 , 38 A. 2d 533 (1944); Strode v. … Wesleyville Borough, 351 Pa. 14 , 40 A. 2d 28 (1944); Mosser v. Mount Union Borough, 158 Pa. Superior Ct. 277 , 44 A. 2d 762 (1945); Balaban v. Severe, 157 Pa. Superior Ct. 463 , 43 A. 2d 543 (1945); Sadusky v.

In re Anonymous No. 11 D.B. 88

4 Pa. D. & C.4th 164 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · May 2, 1989

The matter was subsequently adjudicated by the board at its March 9, 1989 meeting. … render in the civil suit. (5) Thereafter, negotiations were conducted between respondent and a representative of [F] Insurance Company, the insurer of [C]. (6) On February 27, 1985, respondent filed suit captioned [B] et al. v.

In re Anonymous No. 71 D.B. 81

26 Pa. D. & C.3d 471 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Dec 21, 1982

To The Honorable Chief Justice and Justices of The Supreme Court of Pennsylvania SCHIAVO, Board Member, Pursuant to Rule 208(d) of the Pennsylvania Rules of Disciplinary Enforcement (Enforcement Rules), the Disciplinary Board … There is no doubt but that petitioner’s evidence clearly sustains that such action violated all of said Disciplinary Rules mentioned in Section V. above and by more than a clear preponderance of the evidence.

Fitzpatrick v. Penfield

267 Pa. 564 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 22, 1920

A part of this lot, on the side adjoining the standing wall, was an open yard, enclosed at the southern end by a high board fence, with a large closed gate, and a smaller gate cut into the larger one. … This in substance is the principle underlying, Brown v. Lynn, 31 Pa. 510 ; Daltry v. Media Co., supra; Mullen v. Wilkes-Barre Gas & E. Co., 38 Pa. Superior Ct. 3 .

Phila. Mar. Assn. v. Longshoremen's Assn.

382 Pa. 326 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Jun 27, 1955

[footnote] In Amalgamated Association v. … In Schatte v.

Root v. Commonwealth

98 Pa. 170 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Jun 20, 1881

. • Brown, who then occupied the land now owned by defendants, opened a lane from his barn out to this road, and the public passed over it and through an open field to the ford without hindrance. … In order to establish a way by user, the user must be adverse, not permissive : Domuth v. Amweg, 9 Nor. 181. Like principles generally apply when the easement is claimed as public : Gowen v. Phil.

Hempfield School District Appeal

351 Pa. 1 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Sep 26, 1944

It can be challenged only in the manner provided by statute: Riehl v. Miller, 319 Pa. 201, 207 ; Skelton v. Lower Merion Township, 318 Pa. 356, 362 ; Senor v. Dunbar Twp. School Dist., supra, 192. The Act of 1911, P. … The liability thus fixed could have been discharged by payment or subsequent exoneration by the school board.

Fabio v. CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION, ETC.

489 Pa. 309 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Apr 30, 1980

The Police Board of Inquiry found appellant guilty and recommended dismissal. … Bence v. Breier, 501 F.2d 1185 , 1195 (7th Cir. 1969); Goldwasser v. Brown, 417 F.2d 1169, 1177 (D.C.Cir.1969). . See footnote 11.

Lhormer v. Bowen

410 Pa. 508 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 19, 1963

Zoning Board of Adjustment, 377 Pa. 621 , 105 A. 2d 299 *512 (1954). The ordinance conld not apply retroactively: Lened Homes, Inc. v. Dep’t of Licenses, 386 Pa. 50 , 123 A. 2d 406 (1956). The cases of Gold v. Bldg. … See also, Andress v. Zoning Board, 410 Pa. 77 , 188 A. 2d 709 (1963). *513 There is another legal reason why this ordinance was ineffectual to further restrict the use of plaintiffs’ property. The Act of May 4, 1927, P.

Kneebone, R. v. Lutz, P., Aplts.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Apr 28, 2022

Larsen v. Zoning Bd. of Adjustment of the City of Pittsburgh, 672 A.2d 286, 288 (Pa. 1996). An abuse of discretion exists only where the zoning board’s findings are not supported by substantial evidence. Id. at 289. … Keslosky v. Old Forge Civil Serv. Comm’n, 73 A.3d 665, 671 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2013); see also Taliaferro v. Darby Twp. Zoning Hearing Bd., 873 A.2d 807, 811 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2005).