Case law

C. Col. of Beaver C. v. Cc of Bc, S. of F.

99 Pa. Commw. 641 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Aug 13, 1986

Our review of labor arbitration awards follows the well-established “essence test.” … Clearly, the arbitrator’s granting of the grievance is separable from the invalid award of damages. Hence, the court of common pleas correctly omitted only the portion of the award granting the damages.

J. Pilchesky v. Lackawanna County

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · May 9, 2023

Complaint alleged that Defendants’ conduct resulted in the deprivation of Pilchesky’s property rights in contravention of article I, section 1 of the Pennsylvania Constitution.3 Id., ¶¶ 53-60. 2 Rule 1030 establishes … As discussed above, Pilchesky’s claims against Sheriff McAndrew were barred by the common law doctrine of high public official immunity, and his entitlement to immunity was clearly applicable on the face of the Complaint.

Tool Sales & Service Co. v. Commonwealth

149 Pa. Commw. 389 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Jul 22, 1992

Taxpayers qualify for S corporation treatment under federal and state tax laws. 1 During the years in question, Taxpayers were S corporations for both state and federal purposes. … The words of this statute are not precise because they actually do not refer to a clearly discernable and reported figure on the income tax return of all entities subject to the capital stock franchise tax.

Pennsylvania State Police v. Commonwealth

116 Pa. Commw. 89 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · May 10, 1988

, 2) he was qualified to perform, his job duties, 3) he was terminated from his position, and. 4) persons not of *99 his protected class but otherwise comparable were not discharged. … Burdine, 450 U.S. 248 (1981), the burden of establishing a prima facie case is not onerous.

Smith v. Carbon County Board of Assessment Appeals

10 A.3d 393 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Dec 7, 2010

According to Appellants, because Silvestri was qualified only as an expert in real estate appraisal, he was qualified only to render an opinion regarding the market value of real estate. … The teaching of Deitch, Downingtown, and Clifton clearly establish that the Uniformity Clause entitles a taxpayer to pay no more than his fair share; it does not give him a right to pay less.

S. Palmer v. John Doe Sergeant

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · May 5, 2016

“[T]he Commonwealth, and its officials and employees acting within the scope of their duties, shall continue to enjoy sovereign immunity and official immunity and remain immune from suit except as the General Assembly shall … specifically waive the immunity.” 1 Pa.

A. Naginey v. Bureau of Driver Licensing

201 A.3d 290 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Jan 3, 2019

Therefore, if DOT timely suspended the license after receiving notice from the courts of a qualifying conviction, the suspension would stand. … This 37-month delay clearly exceeds the applicable period of Licensee’s license suspension (one year) plus 10 days, and the record provides no explanation for the delay.

J. B. v. Department of Public Welfare

898 A.2d 1221 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · May 9, 2006

The Legislature has determined that the likelihood clearly established abuse has occurred, other than at the hands of the custodian, is so small that prima facie evidence the custodian has caused the injury, either by acts … that the individual intended to dispose of the assets for fair market value, the assets were transferred exclusively for a purpose other than to qualify for assistance, or the assets transferred for less than fair market

Colonial Gardens Nursing Home, Inc. v. Commonwealth

34 Pa. Commw. 131 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 2, 1978

While the testimony offered by Colonial tends to negate a finding of alteration, the evidence presented by the Department clearly supports such a finding, and is, we believe, such evidence as a reasonable mind would accept … Since Department regulations establish procedures to be followed in the keeping of patient medical records, see 28 Pa.

M. Cease v. Housing Auth. of Indiana County

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Feb 19, 2021

Section 514 of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, 42 U.S.C. §1490a, created the USDA’s rural rent supplement program. 2 comparable to what HUD offers qualified … Clearly, there is no discretion in prohibiting admission to such applicants.

Commonwealth v. Barnes & Tucker Co.

23 Pa. Commw. 496 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 2, 1976

Commonwealth Ct. 227 , 315 A.2d 648 (1974), we do not view Barnes & Tucker’s ownership and use of Mine No. 15 as qualifying it for application of this principle. … Saxl, 328 U.S. 80, 83 (1946), that: ‘In no case does the owner of property acquire immunity against exercise of ■the police power because he constructed it in full compliance with the existing laws.’ 14 “14 We summarily dismiss

PA Independent Oil & Gas Assoc. v. PA One Call System, Inc.

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Jan 5, 2021

Because the Supreme Court had concluded that the Port Authority of Allegheny County was entitled to sovereign immunity in Marshall v. … However, this factor alone clearly cannot suffice.

Sterner v. Schuylkill Haven Borough

975 A.2d 1193 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · May 19, 2009

In fact, a review of the record clearly established Sterner believed the proposed storage sheds would increase the likelihood of flooding to Sterner’s property. … “To sustain preliminary objections a complaint must be clearly insufficient to establish any right to *1199 relief, and preliminary objections will not be sustained if any theory of law will support a claim.” Id.

Bowers v. T-NETIX

837 A.2d 608 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Dec 2, 2003

Clearly, the Department is not a telecommunications carrier or a local exchange carrier and the terms of the Telecommunications Act simply do not apply to the Department. … However, the Department is not a public utility and it neither establishes rates nor controls telephone service connections.

In re Condemnation of Lands Situated & Being in Scraton

156 Pa. Commw. 388 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Jun 23, 1993

Condemnors appealed to this Court. 1 It is well established in Pennsylvania that a trial court abuses its discretion when it grants a new trial merely because it would have arrived at a different conclusion on the facts of … In fact, Section 705(2) of the Code, 26 P.S. § 1-705(2), provides that a qualified valuation expert may testify as to the valuation of a property in a variety of ways, and that such testimony is not limited to the enumerated

Kulbitsky Appeal

112 Pa. Commw. 477 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Jan 12, 1988

Superior Ct. at 469-70 , 362 A.2d at 1005 (emphasis added and footnote omitted). *482 Thus, Landy clearly held that civil case rules of evidence apply in forfeiture proceedings. … Kulbitsky testified only that her husband operated legitimate businesses that might have been the source of the money; however, she made no further attempt to establish any particular legitimate source.

Pennsylvania Department of Banking v. NCAS of Delaware, LLC

995 A.2d 422 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Apr 28, 2010

Under Cash Advance Centers’ new line of credit product, a $500 credit line is provided to qualifying Pennsylvania borrowers. … Under Advance America’s line of credit product, Advance America provided a $500 credit line to qualifying Pennsylvania borrowers.

J. Ali v. Philadelphia City Planning Commission

125 A.3d 92 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 1, 2015

The RTKL clearly addresses proposals for construction/redevelopment projects. … Hence, this renders the appeal moot, as these records are clearly subject to disclosure.

Backowski v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal Board

93 Pa. Commw. 339 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Dec 6, 1985

The medical testimony by both parties clearly established that claimant’s injury did prevent him returning to his job in his former capacity. … Botkin, both qualified specialists in. orthopedics, establishes without disagreement that Claimant suffered the disability as claimed from work injuries by aggravation of Claimant’s preexisting condition of spondylolysis.

Spargo v. Zoning Hearing Board

128 Pa. Commw. 193 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Jul 28, 1989

Spargo testified that he invested approximately $20,000 in renovating the property to establish his dental practice within the residence and that the $20,000 cannot be recovered. … Spargo’s third assertion is that the Board erred in finding that his use of the property in 1972 did not qualify as a home occupation under the zoning ordinance then in force. Subsequent to Dr.