Case law

Burkholder v. Zoning Hearing Board

902 A.2d 1006 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Jul 14, 2006

Rather, the General Assembly must clearly express its intent to preempt a field in which it legislated. Id. The test for preemption in this Commonwealth is well established. … Based on these characteristics, Landowners’ proposed Finishing Building qualifies as a “manure storage facility.”

R.A. Naborn v. UCBR

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Feb 19, 2021

who (1) has been separated from his work or who during the week commencing on the Sunday previous to such day has worked less than his full time due to lack of work and (2) is qualified … Finally, “Claimant has the burden of proof to establish that his application satisfies the requirements for backdating a claim for benefits.” Egreczky v. Unemployment Comp. Bd. of Rev., 183 A.3d 1102, 1106 (Pa.

Dynamic Sports Fitness Corporation of America, Inc. v. Community YMCA of Eastern Delaware County

768 A.2d 375 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Feb 1, 2001

The trial court clearly has jurisdiction to review the Sports Club’s claims. … The Act then further defines and quantifies these criteria to meet its goal of establishing uniform standards for addressing the issue of whether an entity qualifies as an institution of purely public charity. 5 .

Tandon v. State Board of Medicine

705 A.2d 1338 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Dec 10, 1997

Clearly, the action underlying the instant action, i.e., Doctor’s loss of professional sta *1346 tus in Tennessee, was not remote in time. DeMarco . … As a result, the “law of the case” doctrine is clearly inapplicable to bind the board to the findings made by the Tennessee Board.

Commonwealth v. 1997 Chevrolet

106 A.3d 836 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Dec 17, 2014

In the opinion of a police officer who conducted the search of the house and was qualified as an expert, the marijuana seized from inside the house was intended for sale. N.T. at 33-36. … Because von Hofe is clearly distinguishable, the Majority errs.

William Penn School District v. PA Department of Education

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · May 7, 2018

Executive Branch Respondents filed preliminary objections in the nature of a demurrer, contending Petitioners fail to state a claim for which relief may be granted because the statutory scheme establishing and providing for … The Supreme Court was clearly able to discern from the petition for review the nature and extent of Petitioners’ claims, notably including the alleged causal link between the alleged constitutional defects to the “current

Scott v. Wilkinson

863 A.2d 62 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Dec 6, 2004

Three qualified electors objected to Denick’s petition. They contended the petition violated the Election Code because Denick held a political office at the time he became a candidate for District Justice. … We noted that the Rules "clearly prohibit a candidate for District Justice from holding an office in a political party.” Id. at 170 (citing Pa. R.C.P.D.J. No. 15B(1)) (emphasis omitted).

K. Hovnanian Pennsylvania Acquisitions, LLC v. Newtown Township Board of Supervisors

954 A.2d 718 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Jul 25, 2008

The applicant must show, in order to qualify, that single prospective residents of apartment housing have attained the age of at least fifty-five (55) years or that families to occupy such units are elderly families (i.e. … Hovnanian posits that it met all the specific criteria for conditional use approval and that an improper burden was imposed upon it to establish that the use will not be detrimental to public health, safety and welfare.

R. Schmidt v. UCBR

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Jun 5, 2025

In a December 15, 2023 decision, Referee Apfelbaum affirmed the service center’s determination and found that Claimant did not qualify for benefits. Id. at 106. … Since the Board had no opportunity to consider those issues, Claimant fails to establish how the Board erred by not considering them. IV.

PNAP v. PA DOS

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Jun 16, 2025

On its second issue, PNAP argues the award of the contract to the Foundation was arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, and contrary to law because the Foundation’s proposal did not meet the clearly defined requirements … Instead, PNAP argues the RFP clearly provides that it was looking for a contractor to provide assistance to nurses by nurses. III. DISCUSSION A. Whether the bid protest was timely.

T.B. Ellington v. Hon. Jennifer H. Sibum

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 11, 2017

Preliminary objections which seek the dismissal of a cause of action should be sustained only in cases where it is clear and free from doubt that the pleader will be unable to prove facts legally sufficient to establish … Cmwlth. 1997). 6 not be applied only if the judge clearly lacks jurisdiction. Stump v. Sparkman, 435 U.S. 349, 356 (1978).

Uniontown Newspapers, Inc., d/b/a The Herald Standard and C. Haines v. PA Dept. of Corrections

151 A.3d 1196 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Dec 19, 2016

OOR found “[DOC] has not established that the Request seeks exempt medical records.” Id. at 9. Indeed, the Request does not seek inmate medical files. … Such emails, if containing inmate diagnosis data, qualify as “responsive records.”

Arippa v. Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission

792 A.2d 636 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Feb 21, 2002

To me, the record clearly demonstrates that the company failed to do so. … Not only did GPU Energy not establish that the costs it incurred as a PLR were not out of its control, but it also faded to meet the second prong because it failed to establish that it was unable to earn a fair rate of return

Landlord Service Bureau, Inc. v. The City of Pittsburgh

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 17, 2023

While [a paid sick days ordinance] certainly burdens [City] employers, it clearly falls within the ambit of the City’s express statutory authority to legislate in furtherance of disease … This Court has explained that “a home[]rule municipality cannot, except where specified 21 clearly by statute or the municipality’s own charter, find itself vested with less power

Western Center, Department of Public Welfare v. Hoon

143 Pa. Commw. 212 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 23, 1991

The commission concluded that employer had failed to establish just cause for removing employee, but that employer had established good cause for a thirty-day suspension. … s mental understanding prior to treatment and to provide proper instructions to staff to insure adequate post-operative care clearly relate to job performance and establish just cause for Dr. Hoon's termination.

Weaver v. Pennsylvania Board of Probation & Parole

688 A.2d 766 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Jan 30, 1997

Kerr challenged the institution’s requirement on the basis that the Narcotics Anonymous meetings were permeated with references to God, thus violating the Establishment Clause. … Even if we were to agree with Weaver’s contention regarding the requirement that he complete the rape treatment program, he nevertheless would not clearly be entitled to the relief requested, i.e., release on parole, because

Prescription Partners, LLC v. Bureau of Workers' Compensation Fee Review Hearing Office (Healthsmart Casualty Claims Solutions)

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Sep 30, 2015

The Supreme Court noted that decisions concerning liability were to be made by “specially qualified workers’ compensation judges” rather than “non-qualified personnel within the Department.” Id. at 198 (emphasis added). … Clearly, this case did not involve a “nurse” who lacks the skills necessary to determine whether Prescription Partners is a provider, but rather, a “specially qualified workers’ compensation judge.”

River's Edge Funeral Chapel and Crematory, Inc. v. ZHB of Tullytown Borough Appeal of: The Borough of Tullytown

150 A.3d 132 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Nov 16, 2016

Based on these definitions of a funeral home and a funeral establishment, it is apparent that the property would constitute a funeral home. … Additionally, the property meets the necessary criteria to qualify as a funeral home under Pennsylvania law and Appellee hired a supervisor, which is necessary to offer funeral services to the public.

C. Aitken v. UCBR

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 16, 2026

To the contrary, the Department’s Overpayment Determination, which Claimant admitted he received, clearly identified August 2, 2021 as the final appeal deadline. … As to the second consideration, non-negligent circumstances will justify an appeal nunc pro tunc only in unique and compelling cases in which the claimant has clearly established he attempted to file an appeal, but unforeseeable

N. Brown v. UCBR

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · May 5, 2022

Aside from submitting the AVD, Claimant also informed Employer that she did not need the flu vaccine because she has a strong immune system and never gets sick. See R. … Under Employer’s policy, certain employees qualified for a religious or medical exemption, for which Employer ostensibly adopted far less-intrusive flu- prevention alternatives, which allowed those employees to avoid the