Case law

Parris v. State Employees' Retirement Board

983 A.2d 821 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Nov 2, 2009

It is well-established that the party who maintains the existence of certain facts must prove those facts.” Wingert v. State Employes' Retirement Board, 138 Pa.Cmwlth. 43 , 589 A.2d 269, 271 (1991). 2 . … The hearing examiner found that Claimant qualified for a total of 9.5698 years of service as age 50 retirement service under the Retirement Code for the period February 7, 1974 to December 1, 1983. 3 .

Larocca v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal Board

140 Pa. Commw. 192 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · May 31, 1991

We have no problem construing claimant’s pro se communication as an “appeal.” 5 By doing so, Pa.R.A.P. 1503 clearly allows it to be regarded as a petition for review, provided that it is clarified by amend *202 ment to include … When seeking to lift a suspension, claimant need only establish continuing disability and recurrence of loss of earnings resulting from a work-related injury. Christopher v.

Philadelphia Electric Co. v. Commonwealth

129 Pa. Commw. 417 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Nov 13, 1989

To pose a rhetorical question: why should counsel ask for a continuance to qualify the reports that had been admitted by the referee? … We believe counsel was clearly misled into believing that the results of the reports, which unquestionably were relevant, were admitted for their natural probative value, which could only be to establish that Claimant was

Ford v. Zoning Hearing Board

151 Pa. Commw. 323 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 28, 1992

Zoning Hearing Board of Manheim Township, 23 Pa.Commonwealth Ct. 361, 352 A.2d 248 (1976), this court recognized that, when the record before the reviewing court clearly shows that there was no evidence before the board that … Accordingly, the decision of this court will be to reverse the trial court’s affirmance of the zoning hearing board’s refusal to remove the conditions, and to direct that the landowner can qualify for the removal of the conditions

Williams Holding Group, LLC v. Board of Supervisors of West Hanover Township

101 A.3d 1202 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Sep 17, 2014

Developer’s narrative references the various EPODs it apparently “established” or identified in its graphic plan. (Id.) … The Ordinance references a term, “best management practices,” that clearly relates to the manner by which construction should be performed.

Simmons v. Delaware County Tax Claim Bureau

796 A.2d 400 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Apr 10, 2002

This case presents a new set of facts, different from other cases in which this court has addressed service defects. *406 Thus, the outcome is not completely clear under established law. … The scope of review in tax sale cases is limited to determining whether the trial court abused its discretion, rendered a decision without supporting evidence or clearly erred as a matter of law.

Laurento v. Zoning Hearing Board

162 Pa. Commw. 226 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Feb 25, 1994

In order to qualify for a variance, an applicant must establish that (1) an unnecessary hardship stemming from unique physical circumstances or conditions of the property will result if the variance is denied; (2) because … Further, Laurento clearly did not meet the requirement that the variances sought will represent the minimum variance that would afford relief.

O. Almusa, M.D. v. State Board of Medicine

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Jul 13, 2023

Licensee does not dispute his conviction or that it qualifies as a felony drug conviction under the Drug Act. … The Commonwealth already met its burden of establishing that Petitioner was convicted of a crime that, at the time, required the automatic suspension of his license.

Simmons v. Snider

165 Pa. Commw. 417 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Jun 28, 1994

non-reimbursement practice are illegal and constitute a failure by DPW to perform legally mandated, non-discretionary duties, then mandamus will lie to compel the performance of those duties and DPW will not be shielded by official immunity … The Pennsylvania Supreme Court has long held that the doctrine of estoppel may be used to prevent the defensive use of a statute of limitations by the State if fraud or concealment is established by the facts.

Frantz v. Baldwin-Whitehall School District

8 Pa. Commw. 639 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · May 9, 1973

Commonwealth Ct. 338 , 284 A. 2d 143 (1971), we held that a court’s function is to read the statutory language as the legislature intends it to be read, and it is only when the legislature has not clearly expressed its intent … L. (1955) 1973, 65 P.S. §§201-209, employees of the Pennsylvania public school system were granted the opportunity to qualify for benefits under the Federal Social Security Act which previously had been extended to state

Greater Greensburg Sewage Authority v. Hempfield Township

5 Pa. Commw. 495 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · May 26, 1972

(Emphasis supplied. ) The court below stated that the nonregistration of the nonconforming use prevented the issuance of the license but, as Section 7(c) clearly states, it is the non-conformance of the place and method of … However, the Hillis farm qualifies as a nonconforming use under the provisions of Section 301.1 of the zoning ordinance which reads as follows: “301.1 ‘Nonconforming use’ means a use, whether of land or of a structure, which

Brookwood Farms v. Milk Marketing Board & Farmers Union Milk Products Ass'n

8 Pa. Commw. 511 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Apr 19, 1973

In that same case, this Court clearly established our interpretation of the legislative intent of Section 801, where we stated that “(1) the producers of milk, (2) transporters, processers, and sellers of dairy products, … The Board’s denial of the dealers and consumers to present any testimony or evidence, as this record clearly establishes (the statement of the Board to the contrary notwithstanding), is in direct violation of the Milk Marketing

Reneski v. Commonwealth, Department of Public Welfare

84 Pa. Commw. 226 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Jul 30, 1984

Commonwealth Ct. 225, 237 , 458 A.2d 288, 293 (1983) (court accords an administrative agency’s interpretation of its own regulations controlling weight unless that interpretation is clearly erroneous or inconsistent with … among all employees of the employer in the same class on the basis of their last regular service ratings, and within this quarter he shall be furloughed in the order of seniority. . . . ” 3 Under section 203’s mandate to “establish

Moyer v. Gudknecht

67 A.3d 71 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Apr 4, 2013

“The purpose of mandamus is not to establish legal rights but only to enforce those legal rights that have already been established.” Orange Stones, 32 A.3d at 290 . … The trial court found that Plaintiffs failed to show that this drawing was an actual survey prepared by a qualified surveyor.

Goodman v. Pennsylvania Department of Public Welfare

695 A.2d 945 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Jun 4, 1997

In the event it is finally determined that Petitioner does not presently qualify for MA/NHC, and thus presumably must leave Leader, it may be important to establish the responsibilities of the various parties in finding appropriate … The Program provides for reimbursement for nursing care services to individuals qualifying for medical assistance.

Butler County Deputy Sheriff's Unit v. Pennsylvania Labor Relations Board

911 A.2d 218 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Nov 15, 2006

This Court went on to note that, even if the strike duties contained in the manual would be sufficient to qualify the deputies as guards, the manual, by itself, is insufficient to establish a separate bargaining unit. … The Board’s interpretation of its governing statutes are to be given "controlling weight” unless its decisions are clearly erroneous. Whitaker Borough v.

Shaulis v. Pennsylvania State Ethics Commission

739 A.2d 1091 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 21, 1999

However, based on the Supreme Court’s ruling in P.J.S., the Commission believes that a new precedent overruling the prior precedent was established. … P.J.S. is clearly factually distinguishable from the present case.

Atlantic Refining & Marketing Co. v. Whitpain Township Zoning Hearing Board

656 A.2d 598 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 22, 1995

On appeal, Atlantic raises the following issues: (1) whether its proposed convenience store qualifies. as an accessory use to the primary use of a gasoline filling station; (2) whether an accessory use is permitted as of … Atlantic’s proposal to build a convenience store that measures forty feet by sixty feet, or 2,400 square feet, clearly violates Section 160-208.

S. Middaugh v. PennDOT, Bureau of Driver Licensing

196 A.3d 1073 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 31, 2018

Cmwlth. 1971), we held the court of common pleas reasonably exercised its discretion in setting aside the license revocation based on the “egregious” 16-month delay and the fact that the licensee established “[h]e was clearly … Both tests require the licensee to establish a delay and prejudice by that delay.

In Re: Condemnation by PennDOT, of Right-Of-Way for SR 0022 in the Twp. of Frankstown Stewart M. Merritts, Jr. v. PennDOT

194 A.3d 722 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Feb 26, 2018

Dep’t of Revenue, 998 P.2d 675, 677 (Or. 2000) (stating that “the government cannot confer its privileges and immunities upon patent grantees”)).) … He stated that because “the inlet and outlet ends of the pipe were clearly substandard[,]” the Department had to move the pipe and was replacing it with the 18-inch pipe in accordance with its policy. (Id. at 135.)