Case law

F.P. Polesky, Jr. and G. Polesky v. PennDOT and G.M. Smith

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Nov 10, 2021

DOT alleged that the Poleskys failed to adduce sufficient evidence to establish that their cause of action fell within an enumerated exception to sovereign immunity and, therefore, their claims against DOT should be dismissed … Summary judgment is appropriate only where the record clearly shows that there are no genuine issues of material fact and the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.

M. Kyung Kim & J. Kyung Kim, h&w v. Com. of PA, DOT

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Feb 9, 2022

Rule 1028(a)(1) of Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure governs the procedure for POs and clearly provides that a PO on the ground of improper venue “may be filed by any party.” … The Court explained that one defendant’s waiver “did not have the effect of establishing proper venue for all remaining defendants.” Id. at 1391.

Schultheis Bros. v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal Board

99 Pa. Commw. 82 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Jul 21, 1986

This Court has clearly stated that modification and reinstatement are two different concepts entailing different burdens of proof. Smith v. Workmens Compensation Appeal Board, 80 Pa. … Consequently, once claimant established that such work was not available, he qualified for reinstatement of total disability benefits.

Pocono Mountain Charter School, Inc. v. Pocono Mountain School District

88 A.3d 275 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Feb 26, 2014

The CAB-1 vote, which was not in writing and did not contain findings, does not qualify as an adjudication. … Thus, to qualify for supplementation, the Supplemental Evidence may not include information that could have been discovered before the record closed in June 2010.

D.N. Hommrich v. Com. of PA, PA PUC

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Aug 13, 2025

However, “no deference is due where an agency exceeds its legal authority, or its interpretation is clearly erroneous.” Marcellus Shale, 292 A.3d at 929 (citations omitted). … Code §75.13(d) and (e), which establishes that EDCs accumulate excess energy supplied until the end of the reporting year (June 1-May 31), after which the EDCs pay the customer-generators.

Fotomat Corp. v. Zoning Hearing Board

51 Pa. Commw. 267 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · May 9, 1980

It is not unduly speculative to consider that they may have been built either before Upper Dublin’s current regulation was enacted, or that they somehow qualified for a variance. … It has the heavy burden of “ ‘clearly establish[ing] [that] the provisions are arbitrary and unreasonable and have no relation to the public health, safety, morals, and general welfare and if the validity is debatable, the

Turner v. Workers' Compensation Appeal Board

78 A.3d 1224 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 16, 2013

However, Curry noted that a retired employee may return to a full-duty job with Employer, assuming he or she qualifies for the position. (R.R. at 107a.) … However, the WCJ rejected her allegation that she had not voluntarily withdrawn from the workforce “as she clearly has work capabilities and has admittedly not looked for work since retiring.”

Rector Church Wardens and Vestrymen of Trinity Church in Oxford Twp.., Philadelphia County v. City of Philadelphia Historical Commission and City of Philadelphia

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Jul 11, 2019

Even presuming such an overarching significance requirement exists, the Commission has the express authority to determine what qualifies as significant. Meyer v. … RLUIPA’s statutory language and relevant case law establish that commercial endeavors such as that here– the sale or lease of property previously used for only secular activities– do not constitute “religious exercise” protected

Mission PA, LLC v. W. McKelvey

212 A.3d 119 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Jun 4, 2019

been properly cited, but were clearly exempt under another subsection. … In its brief, Terrapin adopted DOH’s arguments as to personal identifiers and argued the Applications do not qualify as “financial records” under the RTKL.

Beaver Cem. v. Pa. Human Rel. Comm.

107 Pa. Commw. 190 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Jun 30, 1987

This included a showing that Berardi was not best qualified for the position. Harrisburg School District . … Chevoits, yet clearly supported the authority of Cornell when similar problems recurred while he was manager.

Hahnemann University Hospital v. Workers' Compensation Appeal Board

718 A.2d 391 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Sep 24, 1998

Clearly these findings fail to comport with the requirements expressly set forth by the legislature in the 1996 amendments to section 422(a) of the Act. … To qualify for reinstatement of compensation benefits after the issuance of a termination in favor of an employer, a claimant has the burden of establishing a causal connection between his current condition and the prior

In re Audit Campaign Finance Reports of Dawkins

98 A.3d 755 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Aug 27, 2014

However, “qualified elector” is defined as “any person who shall possess all of the qualifications for voting now or hereafter prescribed by the Constitution of this Commonwealth, or who, being otherwise qualified by continued … Thus, even if Petitioners had established standing, they would not have prevailed on their Petition in light of their failure to produce any evidence establishing that Dawkins, Thompson and/or Moving Frankford Forward committed

Kratzer v. Commonwealth, Department of Public Welfare

85 Pa. Commw. 318 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Sep 26, 1984

Petitioner asserts that requiring her to verify her husband’s income to qualify her minor daughters for AFDC and food stamp benefits where her husband has no legal obligation to provide for their support® violates her daughters … The record before us clearly shows that petitioner did not provide the CAO or DPW any information regarding her husband’s income.

Koren v. Board of Directors of the Jersey Shore Area School District

661 A.2d 449 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Jun 26, 1995

Clearly, none of these reasons advanced by the majority, singly or cumulatively, can meet the burden of proof in this preliminary objection in the nature of a demurrer to establish with certainty in a manner which is clear … seem to me that the interpretation of the Code as Koren maintains, is more likely to fulfill the admittedly twofold purpose of the legislature: (1) to protect the recall rights of suspended professional employees who are qualified

Lynn v. County of Lackawanna

75 Pa. Commw. 238 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Jun 27, 1983

Upon imposition of such a tax rate, any millage increase which exceeds 5% of the preceding year’s rate of millage shall be effective only if approved by a referendum of the qualified electors of the county. … Thus, the tax authorities were not precluded by the trial court’s action in taking judicial notice from establishing, or led to believe that they need not establish, that the 25 mill limitation in Article III, §302 of the

Murray v. Commonwealth

143 Pa. Commw. 358 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Nov 6, 1991

For purposes of blood and urine testing, qualified person means an individual who is authorized to perform those chemical tests under the act of September 26, 1951 (P.L.1539, No. 389), known as “The Clinical Laboratory Act … Clearly, the Code specifically provides that the Department of Health is empowered to enact regulations which prescribe the procedures for chemical tests of blood or urine. 4 *364 Neither DOT nor the local police departments

Tyson v. Commonwealth

684 A.2d 246 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 29, 1996

The Stipulation of Pacts clearly establishes that the family partnership existed at the time of the initial acquisition, that the Tysons were agents of the partnership, that they acted within the scope of the partnership’ … As a necessary corollaiy of the rule of strict construction, it is well established that double taxation must not be imputed as the intent of the legislature without express language clearly showing such intent.

Lyft, Inc. v. Pa PUC K. Lyons and PG Publishing, Inc. d/b/a The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette v. Pa PUC

145 A.3d 1235 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Aug 31, 2016

and should not be reversed unless clearly erroneous. … Lyft contends the trip data evidence qualifies as confidential proprietary information subject to seal.

Mazur v. Trinity Area School District

926 A.2d 1260 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Jun 25, 2007

When the rights of a party are clearly established by defined principles of law, equity should not change or unsettle those rights. Equity follows the law. First Federal Sav. and Loan Ass’n of Lancaster v. … What is absent from the dissent’s analysis is any explanation of what clearly established constitutional, statutory or common law right of Citizens will be vindicated through equitable relief.

L.C. Velez v. J.E. Wetzel, Sec. of Corr'

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 14, 2024

However, courts allow an exception where the defense is “clearly applicable on the face of the complaint.” Minor v. Kraynak, 155 A.3d 114, 121 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2017) (citation omitted). … “The mere occurrence of an accident does not establish negligent conduct.” Id.