Case law

Commonwealth v. Rodebaugh

102 Pa. Commw. 592 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Dec 24, 1986

Our Supreme Court upheld the Commonwealths immunity from taxa *604 tion but remanded the case for the Common Pleas Court to determine whether the Rodebaughs’ reserved interest constituted a taxable life estate. … The Commonwealth should not be able at this stage to avail itself of the argument that it was really the Rodebaughs who breached first, when this is clearly not the case.

Unitedhealthcare of Pa., Inc. v. Pa. Dep't of Human Servs.

187 A.3d 1046 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · May 31, 2018

Thus, the requested proposal documents clearly fall within the exemption until the contract is awarded. … Here, UnitedHealthcare’s requests clearly sought proposal documents and scoring records of the evaluation committee. R.R. at 392a, 434a.

Ernsberger v. ZB OF A., CITY OF PGH.

109 Pa. Commw. 373 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Sep 16, 1987

Having established that the vested right doctrine applies to Owner's situation, we must now examine whether the Board erred in determining that Owner had established the existence of a vested right pursuant to the five-prong … Four of the prongs are clearly met.

K. Hinton v. Sgt. Beers

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Feb 15, 2022

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) (quoting Sweeney v. … See USE OF FORCE POLICY at 3, §III.F (“Planned uses of 9 establish that Prison Employees participated in the cell extraction in the course of their employment.

Martin v. Commonwealth

99 Pa. Commw. 345 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Jul 30, 1986

The Martins’ total income was such that they could qualify as medically needy and be eligible for MA. Mrs. … An applicant for MA clearly fits within the Goldberg sphere of due process concerns.

City of Philadelphia v. Commonwealth

837 A.2d 591 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Dec 2, 2003

Vignola’s background, we find him eminently well-qualified to testify concerning the fiscal affairs of the City of Philadelphia, and further find his testimony completely credible. 28. Mr. … Such a code would clearly contain “more than one subject” which would be prohibited by the first part of [Article III] section three. Id. at 308.

Rev. A.S. Enoxh v. J. Carter

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Aug 25, 2023

Specifically, Appellant argues that Appellees have deprived him of clearly established and well-settled constitutional rights while committing violations of the following statutory provisions: (a.) … Establishing a limited list of exceptions to immunity, the General Assembly adopted what is commonly referred to as the Sovereign Immunity Act, 42 Pa.C.S. §§ 8501-8502, 8521- 8527.

M.S. v. PSP

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Jun 11, 2019

. § 9799.14, establishes a three-tiered system of classification of sexual offenses, with specific enumerated Pennsylvania and federal offenses listed under each tier. … SORNA II became effective, in part, on February 21, 2018, with the enactment of Act 10. 5 Commonwealth,”7 and, therefore, he does not qualify for Tier III sex offender designation

Pennsylvania Human Relations Commission v. School District of Philadelphia

654 A.2d 96 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Jan 6, 1995

(a) An applicant for a stay of proceedings bears the burden to establish the elements necessary for the grant of a stay. … The Court clearly possesses equitable powers and authority to order the School District to remedy the unequal treatment of students and to take necessary steps to eliminate conditions found to exist. See HRC VI.

K. Shunmugam v. City of Bethlehem & Redevelopment Authority of the City of Bethlehem

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 23, 2026

Summary judgment should be granted “only in those cases where the record clearly demonstrates that there is no genuine issue of material fact and that the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of … To establish res judicata, or claim preclusion, a party must establish four factors: “(1) identity of the thing sued upon or for; (2) identity of the causes of action; (3) identity of the persons or parties to the action;

City of Butler v. City of Butler Police Department

780 A.2d 847 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Jul 18, 2001

Third Class City Code The City argues that Section 4301 of the Third Class City Code, provides that there must be a pension fund and clearly' provides that the members are required to make contributions to that fund: *851 … There is no evidence in the record to establish distress or the level of distress under Section 602. 13 .

Zinc Corp. of America v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal Board

145 Pa. Commw. 221 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Jan 28, 1992

Reyes was not qualified or credible; nor did the referee find that Dr. Reyes’ testimony was equivocal, self-contradicting or inconsistent. The referee, under the heading Findings, of Fact, listed the following: 22. … That it should be clearly understood that this Referee will not ignore the expert testimony of Dr. Reyes nor will he substitute his own opinion for that of the doctor.

IN RE: Sr. Health Ins. Co. of PA In Rehabilitation

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Aug 24, 2021

SHIP underestimated the number of people who would become ill and qualify for benefits. … Cantilo and Bodnar, both qualified experts, testified persuasively that policyholders do not make choices based on the maximum present value of their policies.

C. Lesh v. Erie Int'l Airport Svcs., LLC

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Dec 17, 2018

Finally, the trial court 2 concluded that Appellant failed to establish that her claim fell within an exception to immunity under the act commonly known as the Political Subdivision … only when, “after examining the record in the light most favorable to the non-moving party, and resolving of all doubts as to the existence of a genuine issue of material fact against the moving party, the moving party is clearly

C.F. Hughes v. UGI Storage Co.

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Nov 12, 2020

Not even government condemnors enjoy such an immunity. … Succinctly put, Pennsylvania precedent clearly establishes that “intentional action” on the part of condemnor—action that is related to or incident to its condemnation power—will suffice to support a de facto claim in the

A. Brown v. J. Wetzel

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Sep 9, 2016

Respondent asserts Petitioner cannot show that he has an established right, in the prison setting, to receive the records. … “The purpose of mandamus is not to establish legal rights, but to enforce those rights already established beyond peradventure.” Detar, 898 A.2d at 29.

R. Rossman v. DOS of the Com. of PA

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Dec 8, 2025

Here, the Directive clearly fails this three-part test. … The Directive contains no general statements of policy, suggestive language, or predictions as to the Department’s future course of conduct but, rather, clearly establishes a mandatory standard for registration commissions

Medic-9 Paramedic Service, Inc. v. Department of Health

683 A.2d 1275 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 17, 1996

If the General Assembly elects to regulate the quality of ambulance service, but not the number of competitors within a given geographic area, clearly it may do so. 2. … Every emergency medical services council shall adhere to policy direction established by the department. 35 P.S. § 6928(a).

L. Williams v. T. Shawley

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Jun 27, 2019

As a result, they are immune from liability in this matter. Id. … Because the record clearly supports that the Commonwealth defendants were acting within the scope of their employment when the acts alleged by [the employee] were allegedly committed

A. Cruz v. PA Officers Ma Donna, Peachy and McCue -- Appeal of: Police Officer Peachey

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Jan 27, 2017

During charging discussions by counsel with the Trial Court on both trial days, Peachey clearly raised his immunity argument, arguing that a police officer could not be found liable absent a jury finding of willful misconduct … The Supreme Court in Renk clearly recognized that a police officer may be held liable for the intentional torts of assault and battery, and therefore not immune from liability, where a jury has determined that the force used