Case law

S.M. Donahue v. PA DHS

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · May 15, 2026

This remedy clearly encompasses redress for conduct attributed to both OA and the Department. … Thus, Petitioner failed to establish technical discrimination. See Pronko, 539 A.2d at 462.

Plumstead Township Civic Ass'n v. Department of Environmental Resources

142 Pa. Commw. 455 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Sep 23, 1991

Section 1 also requires that this definition be construed as written, unless the context of a subsection “clearly indicates otherwise.” … The clear language of subsection 315(a) places no qualifiers on the type of mining operation to be regulated. It simply states that any person operating a mine will be subject to the rules and regulations of the DER.

East Lampeter Township v. County of Lancaster

744 A.2d 359 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Jan 12, 2000

contend that neither a variance nor a special exception would have been appropriate because Hondares does not request any use permitted by special exception, and, because Hondares has use of the land as zoned, he does not qualify … Clearly then, the whole theory of the Hon-dares Complaint is that, in denying the petition to rezone, the legislative body of the Township was improperly motivated.

Chester Community Charter School v. UCBR

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Nov 22, 2019

had reasonable assurance of continued employment and voluntarily quit her position with Employer; and (2) whether the UCBR erred by failing to consider that Claimant voluntarily quit her position where the record evidence clearly … it is the claimant’s burden to come forward and establish such cause.

In Re Opening Private Road Ex Rel. O'Reilly

954 A.2d 57 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Jul 11, 2008

Knaus, Trustee Under Qualified Personal Residence Trust Agreement, dated July 27, 2000; Joan L. Massella; Donna Durkan; Geraldine R. Altenhof; Elizabeth Beck; Darlene A. Taylor; James E. Spence & Kathy F. … To provide access, a system of roads had to be established.

G.G. Skotnicki v. Insurance Department

146 A.3d 271 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Aug 17, 2016

6108(b) of the Uniform Business Records as Evidence Act provides: A record of an act, condition or event shall, insofar as relevant, be competent evidence if the custodian or other qualified … Contrary to Skotnicki’s contention that the BCS’ May 28, 2014 Investigative Report Order was an adjudication, the BCS clearly stated therein: “[B]e advised that this communication does not constitute an adjudication under

Allegheny Energy Supply Co. v. Township of Blaine

829 A.2d 1254 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Aug 13, 2003

As the grantee of the option to purchase the acreage on which it proposes to construct and operate the facility, Allegheny Energy clearly qualifies as a landowner. … With respect to the requirements in Section 916.1(e), the record does not establish that the published notice complied with these requirements.

A.C. Bender v. DOT

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Jun 30, 2020

Though PennDOT and the Township are government entities and typically immune from liability, Bender alleged that his action against PennDOT fell within the real estate exception to sovereign immunity, which waives immunity … 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

J. Hites, etc. v. PIAA, Inc.

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 10, 2017

that the governing body of a school establish penalties for a coach found in violation of the removal from and return to play rules set forth in the SYSA, and provides for coaches’ immunity from civil liability. … The SYSA does extend immunity to compliant coaches, who may or may not be school employees.

Patton v. Workers' Compensation Appeal Board

958 A.2d 1126 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 22, 2008

With respect to pneumoconiosis, this Court must disagree with Claimant that she established her entitlement to the re-buttable presumption. Both Dr. Schauble and Dr. … This Court agreed with Claimant that the question was the only way to establish that the cause of Decedent's lifetime disability led to his death.

V. Kane v. E. Pisani, Jr.

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · May 24, 2022

Cmwlth. 2019) “A grant of summary 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.” … As explained by our Superior Court: Initially, it must be determined whether the plaintiff has alleged facts sufficient to establish a prima facie case.

Harrington v. Commonwealth

792 A.2d 669 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Feb 21, 2002

I DOT argues that Harrington failed to prove a change of grade, pointing out that this Court in Daw held that the uniform resurfacing of a road in need of repair is normal maintenance work and does not qualify as a change … This clearly differs from an issue as to whether the mere re-topping of a berm that was already paved, as was the case in Daw , constituted a change of grade or caused more runoff.

J. Kline v. PA PUC

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Jan 22, 2026

Thus, in order to qualify for an accommodation, a customer must first “prove, by a preponderance of the evidence - with expert opinion within a reasonable degree of certainty - that the service or facility is unsafe [or unreasonable … He claims that “without the witness testimony, [] Petitioner would have clearly established a claim by a preponderance of the evidence and met his [b]urden of [p]roof that the smart meters have a substantial risk of harm

Freedom Foundation v. PLRB

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Jun 22, 2026

According to the Foundation, neither the Board nor PSEA contend that the Foundation’s report of illegal political contributions qualifies as a “petition” or “charge” under the first sentence of Section 1505. … Board’s Section 1505 Argument The Board argues that it did not clearly err in holding that reports filed under Section 1701 of PERA and 34 Pa.

Pennsylvania Social Services Union, Local 668 ex rel. Baker v. Commonwealth, Department of Public Welfare, Office of Inspector General

699 A.2d 807 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Aug 14, 1997

As individuals whose employment rights and benefits are adversely affected by the OIG determination, claims investigation agents and supervisors who belong to the Union have a substantial interest that clearly differs from … a plan to administer these programs which includes “the establishment and maintenance of personnel standards on a merit basis.”

W.H. v. Com. of PA and PSP

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Dec 23, 2024

XI, state immunity); Reno v. … Therefore, Petitioner has not clearly and without doubt established that he has a clear right to judgment as a matter of law on his equal protection claims, Ducjai, 656 A.2d at 113; Musser, 562 A.2d at 280. IV.

S. Ross v. Dr. R. J. Marsh, Jr., Superintendent

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 11, 2019

The Crockett Court explained: The Commonwealth and its agencies are immune from suit except where the General Assembly specifically waives immunity. … [DOC] never issued a policy, but instead issued a ‘statement of policy’ which is only a description of the interpretation of an established policy.

Seven Stars Farm, Inc. v. Workers' Compensation Appeal Board

935 A.2d 921 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Nov 8, 2007

Regarding the hours Callahan worked, she was aware that Callahan kept track of her hours worked on time sheets that indicated that she was a nurse’s aide even though she was not so qualified. … Moreover, this record establishes that the Carrier had made payment for home health care services in the past without the need for the forms now deemed so vital (See, Arrigo, NT 56-57).

Pennsylvania Game Commission v. Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission

651 A.2d 596 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Dec 6, 1994

Commission) both petitioned for review of an order of the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission (PUC) which considered the removal of eleven railroad crossing structures, allocating the expenses related to the removals and establishing … A party ‘must show a sufficiently close causal connection between the challenged action and the asserted injury to qualify the interest as “immediate” rather than “remote.”’

Tyger & Karl Complete Water System Co. v. Commonwealth

5 Pa. Commw. 154 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Apr 13, 1972

As to a taxpayer attempting to establish his right to an exclusion specified in the statute, the burden of so proving is not as heavy as if he were trying to establish an exempt status. Commonwealth v. … It was there concluded without extended discussion that the slag extracting operation came clearly within the statutory language and that the central issue was the nature of the product extracted.