Case law

Com., Dept. of Public Wel. v. Uec, Inc.

483 Pa. 503 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Jan 24, 1979

The grounds generally advanced for this reluctance bear striking similarity to those offered in support of the doctrine of sovereign immunity. Id.; K. C. Davis, Administrative Law § 17.01 (1959). … Clearly the Code provision was not intended to burden the Department of Justice with every conflict arising between an agency of the Commonwealth and one of its citizens.

Commonwealth v. Morley

545 Pa. 420 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Jul 29, 1996

Yet, Pomponi was clearly premised on the Fifth Amendment, and did not reference the Pennsylvania Constitution. See Pomponi 447 Pa. at 162 , 284 A.2d at 712 . … The view that the reasoning of D’Elia applies only to cases involving the granting of immunity to witnesses before the Crime Commission was confirmed in this court’s unanimous decision in Commonwealth v.

Commonwealth v. Littlejohn

433 Pa. 336 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Jan 24, 1969

This language.in our judgment virtually compels an immunity from jeopardy of the death penalty for ap *343 pellants in these cases. … Since this rule clearly encompasses the testimony complained of here, there is no supportable basis to appellant’s argument. Appellant’s third claim involves an event which occurred during the trial.

Keller-Pike Co. v. Wetter

252 Pa. 340 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Feb 14, 1916

The charge itself, as a whole, clearly shows that Keller-Pike Company was treated as responsible for any delay caused by its subcontractors. … In our cases, cited by the appellants, the objectionable word is qualified by other words Avhich clearly required a higher degree of proof than in similar cases.

Commonwealth v. Campbell

539 Pa. 212 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Dec 28, 1994

Appellant should not benefit from such doubt since the evidence established beyond a reasonable doubt that Appellant conspired to sell drugs. … In both instances, the jury is presented with the same evidence in the same trial and returns a verdict which is clearly inconsistent. *221 Our decision today is also in accord with substantial federal case law. U.S. v.

Gottschall v. Campbell

234 Pa. 347 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Jan 2, 1912

The necessity for classification of the counties of the state, with respect to the courts, is clearly recognized in the constitution. … Reeder, J., said (p. 193) : “The act is also clearly constitutional.

Commonwealth v. Woodard, A., Aplt.

634 Pa. 162 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Dec 3, 2015

If the photograph is inflammatory, the trial court must determine whether the photograph is of such essential evidentiary value that its need clearly outweighs the likelihood of inflaming the minds and passions of the jurors … The Commonwealth maintains that this meager showing of “any” or “some” evidence necessary to refute a pretrial challenge to an alleged aggravating circumstance was clearly satisfied here as Dr.

Greenspan v. United Services Automobile Ass'n

324 Pa. Super. 315 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Jan 20, 1984

Defendant’s settlement offer of September 11, 1981, failed to qualify defendant for any exemption from damages for delay pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. 238(e). *320 16. Damages for delay are calculated as follows: A. … Any reading of Rule 238 which would provide immunity to an uninsured motorist carrier would be incorrect, and, in any event, any ambiguity must be resolved in favor of plaintiffs[-appellants]. Blocker v.

Earle Estate

369 Pa. 52 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Dec 27, 1951

When we peruse the provision in question we see that the testator establishes a class composed of such of his grandsons as are born to his sons and defines the qualifications of members of that class explicitly by the words … It is argued that the establishment of the trust for an afterborn grandson is not consistent with the general plan of the will because his life estate under Item Fifth of the will may continue beyond the termination date

Diehl v. Unemployment Compensation Board of Review (ESAB Group, Inc.)

618 Pa. 592 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Dec 28, 2012

Upon remand, the parties may need to explore this issue further to determine whether Employee is "otherwise qualified” for unemployment compensation benefits. . … Therefore, to qualify for benefits, he must fall under the VLO Proviso. . In Sievers, 551 A.2d 1057 , this Court affirmed per curiam without analysis.

Waschak v. Moffat

379 Pa. 441 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Nov 8, 1954

His case was made out if he showed that the defendant’s business, though lawful in itself, was carried on clearly to his injury,— that is the standard established in this State in many of our decisions. [Citing cases.] … It applies them in the light of the facts so clearly established in the 600 printed pages of testimony. I would affirm the decision of the Superior Court. Italics throughout, mine.

McKnight v. Ratcliff & Johnson

44 Pa. 156 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · May 6, 1863

The affirmative of these positions is the substance of the first three points of the defendant below, and they were negatived *165 without a qualifying remark. … The authorities seem very clearly to sustain these positions: Collyer on Part. §§ 457, 460; Story on Part. § 166, and authorities there cited; Hill on Torts 434-461; Weed v. Panama Railroad Co., 17 N. Y.

Mowery v. Prudential Property & Casualty Ins.

369 Pa. Super. 494 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Jan 4, 1988

It *500 was held that this important interest is very closely related to the classification established by the statutory scheme. In James v. … it has been established, our inquiry whether the statute violates the equal protection clause is at an end.”

Commonwealth, Aplt. v. Lukach, J.

195 A.3d 176 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 17, 2018

to talk, but, qualifies that statement with a statement of “I don’t know” and a general assertion of innocence? b. … The facts in this case are clearly distinguishable from the scenario at issue in Patane.

Patricca v. Zoning Board of Adjustment

527 Pa. 267 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · May 9, 1991

established as a parking area. … This is clearly within thirty days as prescribed by the rules. 3 . "Front Street” is not defined by the zoning ordinance. 4 .

Hogg v. Bessemer & Lake Erie Railroad

373 Pa. 632 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · May 25, 1953

After considering all of the evidence in this case most favorably to the plaintiff as we are obliged to do, it clearly establishes negligence on the part of the decedent. … No one is required to anticipate conduct on the part of another which clearly violates the standards of due care established by statutory and decisional law.

Thiemann v. Allen

485 Pa. 431 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · May 31, 1979

. § 3133 (1978) provides: “Whenever two or more judges of the Commonwealth Court are to be elected pursuant to 3131(c) (relating to selection of judicial officers for regular terms) at the same election, each qualified elector … are now unimportant and we pass no opinion upon them; the court is established; the office is made elective to be filled by the candidates elected at the general election.”

Branchick v. COM., DEPT. OF LABOR & IND.

496 Pa. 280 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Nov 6, 1981

Here, appellant has failed to establish that political animus was, to any extent, a motivating factor in his dismissal. … Further, it presupposes that administration officials will prevaricate to establish an ex post facto apolitical rationale for their action.

Thirteenth & Fifteenth Street Passenger Railway v. Boudrou

92 Pa. 475 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Feb 2, 1880

Here, perhaps, the rule is not qualified to so great an extent; yet it is clear, that a plaintiff may recover, though he did not use due care, if his negligence in nowise caused the accident resulting in his injury. … But it has been repeatedly held that certain facts, when established, amount to negligence per se; Hoag v. Lake Shore & M. S. Railroad Co., 4 Norris 293.

Wells v. Bain

75 Pa. 39 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Dec 6, 1873

If overpowered, the new government would be established, not by peaceful means, but by actual revolution. … What then does the word manner qualify or pertain to in this section ? Clearly it is the submission — “ Shall submit the amendments” “ in such manner as the convention shall prescribe, subject to,” — subject to what?