Case law

St. Clair Hospital v. Unemployment Compensation Board of Review

154 A.3d 401 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Feb 2, 2017

Thus, to establish that a medical condition is a necessitous and compelling reason for the voluntary termination of one’s employment, a claimant must: (1) establish, through competent evidence, the existence of a … As Claimant clearly indicated her desire to “maintain the employment relationship … it was then incumbent upon the [E]mployer to provide suitable work.” 451 A.2d at 1356 (emphasis added).

COM. DOT, BUR. OF DR. LIC. v. Gaertner

138 Pa. Commw. 423 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 11, 1991

She was qualified as an expert in the field of deaf and hearing impaired communications and testified that deaf people normally have a sixth to eighth grade educational level. … While Gaertner maintains that Yi is controlling because sign language is akin to a foreign language, the department contends that the present case is clearly distinguishable from Yi and more in line with Peck .

Central Dauphin School District v. Commonwealth

146 Pa. Commw. 32 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Feb 7, 1992

, and that Secretary Carroll was immune from suit. … We note that the Secretary has failed to pursue the standing issue and the two immunity issues. Therefore, we deem these issues waived.

Cutler v. State Civil Service Commission

924 A.2d 706 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · May 17, 2007

The Office of Administration found Cutler not qualified for one of the thirte'en openings in the PMA program. … In 1972, the Governor’s Office, under authority of Article IV of the Pennsylvania Constitution, established the “Directives Management System.” See 4 Pa.Code §§ 1.1 — 1.5.

Keller v. State Ethics Commission

860 A.2d 659 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Nov 1, 2004

Thus, the General Assembly by this chapter intends to define as clearly as possible those areas which represent conflict with the public trust. 65 Pa.C.S. § 1101.1(a) (emphasis added). … similar to the concerns raised by Keller’s conduct, i.e., that allowing a public official to serve as a conduit for a charitable contribution would amount to electioneering and could invite arbitrary decisions as to what is a qualified

V. Garanin v. Scranton Housing Authority

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Sep 23, 2022

According to the trial court, Garanin could not establish an exception to the Agency’s sovereign immunity. … immunity.

T. Anderson v. PPB

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 20, 2021

Because [Anderson] incurred a qualifying misconduct under the statute, the Board acted within its authority by rescinding automatic reparole in this case. … The record in this matter establishes that the Board decision mailed April 9, 2018[,] is supported by substantial evidence, does not constitute an error of law, and does not violate

Demmy v. Pennsylvania State Police

148 Pa. Commw. 401 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Jun 5, 1992

In Pacific Gas, the United States Supreme Court said: It is well established that within constitutional limits Congress may pre-empt state authority by so stating in express terms. Jones v. … The fact that the language relating to certification in § 12.5 is in the past tense does not change our interpretation of the language in § 21.21, which clearly implicates standards for original certification as they now

A.A. Wolk v. The Sch. Dist. of Lower Merion

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 2, 2020

the court below, and we will not consider the merits of the case or pass upon reasons for or against such action, unless it is plain that no such grounds existed or that the rules of law relied on are palpably wrong or clearly … Administrative Agency Law and the Local Agency Law, an “adjudication” is defined as follows: Any final order, decree, decision, determination or ruling by an agency affecting personal or property rights, privileges, immunities

Miller v. Workers' Compensation Appeal Board

44 A.3d 726 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · May 25, 2012

However, it is not necessary that the injured body part be one hundred percent useless in order for the loss of use to qualify as being for all practical intents and purposes. … We have repeatedly ruled that it is not necessary that the injured body part be 100 percent useless in order for the loss of use to qualify as being for all practical intents and purposes.

B. Keith v. Commonwealth of PA, by and through PA Department of Agriculture

151 A.3d 687 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Sep 9, 2016

Generally, “[t]he interpretation of a statute by those charged with its execution is entitled to great deference, and will not be overturned unless such construction is clearly erroneous.” Caso v. … Agencies also devise rules and regulations that do not in themselves establish binding standards of conduct.

DePaul Concrete v. Workers' Compensation Appeal Board

734 A.2d 481 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Jul 19, 1999

to subrogation under the post-August 1993 version of Section 1720. 2 The Supreme Court found in Bell that the fact that suit was filed after a February 1975 amendment to the Workers’ Compensation Act conferring employer immunity … established.

Network for Quality M.R. Services v. Commonwealth, Department of Public Welfare

833 A.2d 271 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Jul 18, 2003

currently used by the Department to set per diems and otherwise determine reimbursement paid to Network Providers are not reasonably related to the actual cost of hiring, training and retaining a consistently stable, properly qualified … Section 35.19 of Title 1 of the Administrative Code provides: Petitions for the issuance, in the discretion of an agency, of a declaratory order to terminate a controversy or remove uncertainty, shall state clearly and concisely

Career Connections Charter High School v. School District of Pittsburgh

91 A.3d 736 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · May 19, 2014

The CAB interpreted this statement as establishing a goal of meeting the requirements for student performance set forth in the PDE’s regulations. B. … Violating the No Child Left Behind Act by failing to meet its requirements pertaining to Highly Qualified Teachers. 6.

Neshaminy School District v. Neshaminy Federation of Teachers

171 A.3d 334 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Sep 18, 2017

This public policy is well-established in our precedent. Phila. Housing Auth., 52 A.3d at 1123-24 . … error in [the arbitrator’s] determination that any public policy regarding [the use of] aversive [teaching] techniques was not so well-defined [as to] and ascertainable by reference to the laws and legal precedents as to qualify

R. Mercaldo v. Department of Corrections

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Jul 16, 2025

DOC rejoins that Petitioner has failed to establish that DOC is liable for his loss, arguing that there is no vicarious liability for actions of supervised employees. Id. … defense; and whether the act fits within one of the nine exceptions to sovereign immunity.”

Naval Surface Warfare Center Carderock Division v. Unemployment Compensation Board of Review

106 A.3d 256 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Dec 12, 2014

the employee is ineligible for unemployment compensation, but where the employee retires upon the employee’s own initiative, the employee must demonstrate a necessitous and compelling reason for the separation in order to qualify … The evidence in the record, the majority of which consists of the testimony of Employer’s witnesses, clearly supports the Board’s determination that the practical effect of Employer’s plan was a layoff of Claimant.

Downs Racing, L.P. v. Com. of PA

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Dec 19, 2022

The parties may establish the record and identify any disputed questions of fact by filing stipulations. Pa. R.A.P. 1571(f). … Id., ¶ 39. 4 Under the incremental cost approach, a company immediately recognizes revenue at the time of the qualifying purchase.

Price v. Pennsylvania Board of Probation & Parole

781 A.2d 212 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Jul 23, 2001

Laboratory Report While laboratory reports are technically hearsay evidence, they may be admitted in revocation hearings where the offender makes no objection or over his objection if they are qualified as either a business … In response, the Board argues that the decision to recommit Petitioner was clearly supported by substantial evidence.

T.E. Bold, Jr. v. Bureau of Driver Licensing

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Nov 21, 2022

In a footnote, however, the trial court “concede[d] that the facts clearly show that [] Licensee was in control of the ‘operation’ of the vehicle.” Id. at 52a n.6. … Furthermore, there are establishments that serve alcohol nearby.