Case law

Berks Products Corp. v. Arch Insurance Co.

72 A.3d 315 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Jul 11, 2013

Accordingly, a surety that intends to avoid liability should include an express provision in the bond establishing the same. Pennsylvania Supply Company v. … necessary payments to its subcontractor. 8 Similarly, in the present case, Berks was excluded from seeking redress under the Mechanics’ Lien Law of 1963 inasmuch as the current project was a public project and, therefore, immune

D. Krimm and A. Krimm, his wife v. Municipal Authority of Westmoreland County

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Dec 30, 2016

Clearly, the dangerous condition, as alleged, originated with the conduct of the [water authority’s employees].” Id. at 1175. Consequently, we held that the water authority was immune from liability. … Therefore, Metropolitan Edison is clearly distinguishable from this case.

Finnerty v. Pa. Dep't of Cmty. & Econ. Dev.

208 A.3d 178 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Apr 25, 2019

Thus, the record clearly establishes a contractual relationship between the Department and EConsult, McNees, and Fairmount for the purposes of implementing, pursuant to Act 47, the Recovery Plan. … The evidence established that there was a contract between the Department, EConsult, McNees, and Fairmount.

National Properties, Inc. v. Borough of MacUngie

141 Pa. Commw. 342 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Jul 19, 1991

Legislation will not be declared unconstitutional unless it “clearly, palpably, and plainly violates the constitution.” Snider v. … Twenty-four commercial establishments in the Borough are required to have their refuse collected by the Borough. (684a). 6 .

Reading School District v. I-Lead Charter School

206 A.3d 27 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 14, 2019

highly-qualified teacher3 requirements (HQT) was erroneous. After review, we vacate and remand. I. … The CSL encourages the establishment of schools to serve a variety of purposes.

J. Hill v. PA. DGS, PA DOC and Philadelphia CCC4

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · May 13, 2020

and can only be granted in cases where it is clear a cause of action was not established. … We then considered whether the first ruling was clearly erroneous and would create a manifest injustice if allowed to stand.

E. Gosner, Sr. v. UCBR

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Jun 30, 2020

In order to establish cause of a necessitous and compelling nature, a claimant must establish that (1) circumstances 3 Claimant was unrepresented at the hearing and Employer did not appear. … order to receive benefits, must be ‘able to work and available for suitable work,’ [Section 401(d)(1) of the Law,] 43 P.S. § 801(d)(1), and we are aware that a claimant may not qualify

D. Thomas v. Hemlock Twp.

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Nov 14, 2023

There are several exceptions to this grant of immunity, including the vehicle liability exception. … “[S]ummary judgment is only appropriate where the record clearly shows that there are no genuine issues of material fact and that the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.” Brown v.

Sen. J. Costa v. Sen. K. Ward & Sen. J. Coleman

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Feb 9, 2023

provides for the electronic transfer of completed voter registration applications and changes of address; permits the auditing of each registered elector’s registration record; identifies the election district to which a qualified … Equity is discretionary with the court and should be exercised only “where the facts clearly establish the plaintiff’s right thereto; where no adequate remedy at law exists; and where the chancellor believes that justice

Com. of Pa. v. RODEBAUGH ET UX.

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

Our Supreme Court upheld the Commonwealth's immunity from taxation *604 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.

Ristvey v. Commonwealth, Department of Transportation

52 A.3d 425 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Jul 11, 2012

Obedience to such regulation is not taking property without due process; that clause does not qualify the police power. In Re Condemnation of Two Billboards, 452 A.2d at 85 , quoting Reilly v. … (b) The secretary may issue permits for the opening of streets and driveways onto State highways and for the opening of the surface and occupancy of State highways on terms and conditions established in department regulations

County of Berks v. Teamsters Local 429

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Dec 1, 2023

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY The underlying subject of this appeal is the December 2, 2021 Act 195 Interest Arbitration Award (Award), which establishes the terms and conditions for a collective bargaining … The decision to elect to exempt Jail Employees and other emergency responders from the FFCRA was clearly the County’s managerial prerogative.

CSX Transportation, Inc. v. Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission

125 Pa. Commw. 528 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · May 2, 1989

. *536 Section 10903 of the Revised Interstate Commerce Act is clearly not in conflict with Section 2702 of the Code. … This also qualifies CSXT as a concerned party, subject to the jurisdiction of the Commission.

K.M. Kaplafka Jr. v. PSP

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Feb 7, 2020

Courts have permitted a limited exception to this rule and allowed parties to raise the affirmative defense of immunity as a preliminary objection in cases where it is “clearly applicable on the face of the complaint” and … The purpose of mandamus is not to establish legal rights, but to enforce those rights already established.

G. Mejia v. UCBR

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · May 12, 2016

Clearly, Claimant was properly informed regarding his right to appeal. … The burden to establish the right to have an untimely appeal considered is a heavy one because the statutory time limit established for appeals is mandatory.

North Hills School District v. Pennsylvania Labor Relations Board

762 A.2d 1153 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Dec 1, 2000

Thus, Santillo indisputably qualifies as a “representative associated with collective bargaining” on behalf of the School District. … In essence, the [PLRB] argues that [the School District] had the burden of establishing the confidential nature of Dougherty’s duties and it failed to do so.

S.T. Young v. The Estate of Frank J. Young and Norma Young

138 A.3d 78 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Apr 12, 2016

Young’s Estate, they clearly had a direct and substantial interest in Plaintiff’s action seeking a monetary award against Defendants. Voegtly’s Estate. … However, the right to argument under Rule 211 is a qualified right subject to judicial discretion. Gerace v. Holmes Prot. of Phila., 516 A.2d 354 (Pa. Super. 1986); City of Phila. v. Kenny, 369 A.2d 1343 (Pa.

George v. Commonwealth, Department of Transportation

168 Pa. Commw. 517 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Nov 23, 1994

In order to qualify for the exception, former testimony must be offered as evidence pertinent to an issue involving the same subject matter as that upon which the witness was previously examined. 3 42 Pa. C.S. § 5934. … Our Supreme Court concluded that all four factors existed in Yuda-cufski and held that the trial court abused its discretion in failing to follow the precedent established in Seltzer.

McGrath v. Bureau of Prof'l & Occupational Affairs

146 A.3d 310 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Aug 24, 2016

Redman, 96 A.3d 332, 340 (Pa. 2014) (noting that after the Supreme Court abolished common law sovereign and governmental immunity, the General Assembly enacted legislation restoring that immunity). … has cautioned: While it is true that great consideration should always be accorded precedent, especially one of long standing and general acceptance, it doesn’t necessarily follow that a rule merely established

In re Condemnation by the Commonwealth

124 Pa. Commw. 314 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 21, 1989

Therefore, if appellants’ argument is to fit into one of the allowable categories of preliminary objections, it must qualify as an objection to ‘any other procedure followed by the condemnor. ’ However, in Simco Stores, Inc … The legitimate public interest in keeping certain lands as open space obviously requires that a proper determination of the use to which land shall be adapted must be made, but again this is clearly not a statutory function