Case law

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.

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.

R.J. Puleo & L.B. Puleo v. The Borough of Phoenixville

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Jul 10, 2020

[POs] in the nature of a demurrer should be sustained only where the pleadings are clearly insufficient to establish a right to relief; any doubt must be resolved in favor … Hill, 16 A.3d 484, 494 (Pa. 2011), wherein the Pennsylvania Supreme Court stated, in pertinent part: Our jurisprudence is clear and well-settled, and firmly establishes that: [Pa.

Pennsylvania State Police v. Commonwealth

136 Pa. Commw. 381 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Nov 29, 1990

The complainant in that case was discharged for failure to obtain a graduate degree, clearly an objective criterion, and we recognized an employer’s right to condition employment upon such a criterion. … It appears that the likely analysis under General Electric would have been a conclusion that the complainant in Slippery Rock did not make out a prima jade case in that she could not establish that she was qualified for the

Neshannock Educational Support Professionals Ass'n, PSEA/NEA v. Pennsylvania Labor Relations Board

22 A.3d 1103 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Jun 14, 2011

Roppa with financial information on two occasions was insufficient to establish a close continuing relationship with them. We agree. … Thus, Santillo indisputably qualifies as a “representative associated with collective bargaining” on behalf of the School District.

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

D. Lorenzen v. W. Cornwall Twp. ZHB & Sunoco Pipeline, L.P. ~ Appeal of: D. Lorenzen

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 23, 2019

Sunoco contends that Appellants are not in sufficient proximity to establish standing, and they did not establish any direct injury that will result from the Structures. … While Objectors could clearly establish standing with respect to potential environmental and safety problems if the use at the site was in issue, I believe that the testimony regarding potential harm to them with regard to

Commonwealth v. After Six, Inc.

33 Pa. Commw. 472 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Feb 3, 1978

The Commonwealth does not contest that After Six’s stock in its foréign subsidiaries qualifies for the Act of 1927 exemption and that its domestic subsidiary stock falls within the ambit of the judicial exemption of Fall … Such a computation clearly does not reflect that proportion of assets which are taxable.

Starr v. State Board of Medicine

720 A.2d 183 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Nov 4, 1998

In proceedings based on this paragraph, actual injury to a patient need not be established. … And third, a fair reading of both documents clearly establishes that they are summaries of the April 25-26, 1996 joint session.

Knorr v. Workers' Compensation Appeal Board

705 A.2d 1370 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Jan 26, 1998

Section 444 of the WC Act governs dual compensation and provides as follows: No person who is qualified for or is receiving compensation under this act, shall, with respect to the same period, receive compensation under The … By decision circulated on March 27, 1991, Judge Spizer denied claimant’s claim petition brought pursuant to the WC Act after finding that claimant failed to establish that he suffered from and was disabled by chronic obstructive

Izzi v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal Board

654 A.2d 176 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Jan 19, 1995

Although, like the Majority, I recognize that the rule set forth in 34 Pa.Code § 321.22 clearly provides for notice of reassignment to the parties, I cannot agree that it guarantees a claimant the right to reject a reassigned … Thus, where, as here, Claimant’s objections lack legitimacy, the failure to notify him of the reassignment cannot qualify as cause requiring rehearing in the interests of justice.

Nickel v. Workers' Compensation Appeal Board

959 A.2d 498 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 22, 2008

To qualify for federal funding, DPW must administer its MA Program in conformity with federal requirements. Section 1902 of the SSA, 42 U.S.C. § 1396a. … Clearly, a provider may choose not to accept funds from Medicaid if it wishes to preserve its right to seek its entire customary charge. Evanston, 1 F.3d at 542 .

J. Texeira v. DOT

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Aug 30, 2022

The trial court specifically held that the claim did not fall within the pothole exception to sovereign immunity, 42 Pa.C.S. §8522(b)(5), because Texeira failed to establish that … We held that the trial court’s analysis of the evidence amounted to fact-finding and invaded the jury’s 3 Summary judgment may be granted only in those cases where the record clearly shows that there are

K.L. Burley, Jr. v. State Rep. A. Bernstine

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 2, 2023

Legislative Respondents point out that even if Markie’s Law is enacted, its terms clearly provide it would not be applied retroactively. (Id. ¶ 52.) … Bernstine, they are protected by Speech and Debate immunity.

Kruth v. Commonwealth, Department of Transportation, Bureau of Driver Licensing

856 A.2d 901 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Aug 26, 2004

Miller was not a qualified police officer under the Implied Consent Law. Alternatively, McKinley argued Cpl. Miller lacked authority to enforce the Code off airport property. … Clearly, Sgt. Long had reasonable grounds to stop Kruth based upon the conduct observed in Shaler. Sgt. Long continued to follow Kruth from Shaler to Etna where he was arrested.

C. Rouse v. R.S. Williams

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Aug 28, 2017

where plaintiff’s complaint against district attorney and state trooper failed to make factual averments of conduct constituting crime, actual fraud, actual malice, or willful misconduct and where conduct of defendants was clearly … Appellant, therefore, has not overcome his burden of pleading facts, which if accepted as true, establish a right to relief.12 B.

2800 N. Broad St., LLC v. Com. of PA, DOT

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Jul 2, 2021

It also contended that Condemnee failed to allege or to establish any exceptional circumstances that substantially deprived it of the beneficial use and enjoyment of the properties, other than the declaration of taking. … Section 502 of the Code clearly delineates distinct procedures for requesting a board of viewers depending on whether a declaration of taking has been filed.

J.K. Musgrave IV v. PA LCB

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Sep 9, 2025

“It is well-established that a person who is not adversely affected in any way by the matter he seeks to challenge is not ‘aggrieved’ thereby and has no standing to obtain a judicial resolution of his challenge.” … Cmwlth. 1995) (“In short, Section 404 clearly and unequivocally now provides . . . that the Board must issue a restaurant license to a qualified person and for a qualified premises . . . by transfer.”).

Commonwealth v. United States Steel Corp.

15 Pa. Commw. 184 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Sep 6, 1974

We sympathize with the Judge of *190 the lower court who was faced with novel inspection procedures designed and implemented by governmental employes who, though qualified from an educational standpoint, were novices working … As already stated, the order of the court upon which the subject petition was based was a consent decree. *191 The effect of sueli a decree was clearly stated in Commonwealth v. Rozman, 10 Pa.

Meade v. City of Philadelphia

65 A.3d 1031 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 20, 2013

The Act clearly authorizes the appointment of members of the BRT for a definite term and the City has conceded as much. … The role of the BRT has changed, and it would be illogical for officials whose jobs have fundamentally changed to be immune from salary changes.