Case law

C. Soles v. Garnet Valley S.D. (WCAB)

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Apr 14, 2023

DeSouza and Malumed were more qualified 3 to opine on Claimant’s injury. … Section 422(a) of the Act requires a WCJ’s decision to “clearly and concisely state[] and explain[] the[ir] rationale.” 77 P.S. §824.

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

Osborne Associates, Inc. v. Unemployment Compensation Board of Review

3 A.3d 722 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Aug 13, 2010

Thus, it was clear in Glen Mills that the Dental Law prohibited dental hygienists from working as independent contractors by expressly requiring them to work under the direct supervision of another, more qualified employing … Specifically, the Court stated: *732 Here, the record and the Board’s findings clearly support the conclusion that GBS controlled or had the authority to control Wamsley’s day-to-day operations: 1) that GBS set the general

T. Costa and K. Costa, and Elmtowne Gardens, LLC v. City of Allentown

153 A.3d 1159 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Jan 12, 2017

’s expert, to substantiate the license fee, 3 Our standard of review is limited to determining whether the trial court abused its discretion, rendered a decision with a lack of supporting evidence, or clearly … on the probable costs of the private industry to perform” the services provided by the Rental Program, including registration, inspection, and investigation of disruptive conduct complaints and that “these two, very well qualified

Cook v. Commonwealth

45 Pa. Commw. 415 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Sep 5, 1979

Whether BVR’s practice of refusing to provide post baccalaureate degree training to otherwise qualified individuals is invalid as a regulation because it was not promulgated pursuant to the Act of July 31, 1968, P.L. 769, … (AAL). 9 Section 51 of the AAL, 71 P.S. §1710.51 (a) (37), clearly made the Act’s provisions applicable to BVR proceedings.

E. Knelly v. PA DOH

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Dec 13, 2023

Clearly Knelly as an EMT would have the same responsibility with a patient that he is providing service to under his charge. … Although a nolo contendere plea clearly qualifies as a “conviction” under Section 8121(a)(14) of the EMS Act, the plea itself does not establish the alleged facts so heavily relied upon by Department officials in initially

D. Young v. J. Wetzel, PA DOC

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 16, 2021

These protocols established that “legal mail will be copied by [DOC] staff wearing protective clothing in the presence of inmates and original documents were placed in a secure bag and maintained for 15 business days.” … Dismissal on this ground was clearly erroneous, and the Trial Court offered no other grounds for dismissal. Nevertheless, this error does not necessitate reversal.

Suburban Cable TV Co. v. Commonwealth

131 Pa. Commw. 368 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Feb 14, 1990

In concluding that the activity involved here does not constitute exempt manufacturing, this court need not fall into the abysses established on each side of the issue by the Commonwealth or by the taxpayers. … § 42.1, has promulgated a regulation drawing from the statutory phrase “licensed commercial or educational station” the concept that only television stations licensed as such by the Federal Communications Commission can qualify

Grey Fox Plaza v. Herbert, Rowland and Grubic, Inc.

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Jan 30, 2017

We do not agree. 18  The trial court correctly held that Plaintiffs clearly and unambiguously dedicated the unbuilt portion of Grey Fox Drive as a public street. … Super. 2015) (“to establish a claim for trespass, a plaintiff must prove an intentional entrance upon land in the possession of another without a privilege to do so”).

Malt Beverages Distributors Ass'n v. Pennsylvania Liquor Control Board

966 A.2d 1172 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 2, 2009

Dunham testified, in his years *1178 of experience studying retail establishments, he found that similar retail establishments often locate together to enhance all of their businesses. … It noted the proposed licensed area would be clearly separated from the unlicensed portions of the premises by four-foot high barriers.

Malt Beverages Distributors Ass'n v. Pennsylvania Liquor Control Board

966 A.2d 1165 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 2, 2009

Dunham testified, in his years of experience studying retail establishments, he found that similar retail establishments often locate together to enhance all of their businesses. … It noted the proposed licensed area would be clearly separated from the unlicensed portions of the premises by four-foot high barriers.

Valley Stairs & Rails v. Workers' Comp. Appeal Bd.

202 A.3d 904 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Jan 24, 2019

Crucially, however, regardless of the way that Employer classified the monetary payment on the pay stub, we must apply the qualifying language which appears in the Regulations regarding payment of wages. … The WCJ determined that because the temporary compensation payment and the NTCP established that Claimant’s disability commenced on March 30, 2015, Employer timely filed its notice of compensation denial (NCD) and notice

G. Pittman v. Com. of PA., PA DOC

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Jan 2, 2024

Petitioner repeats his prayer for: mandamus relief ordering his discharge from prison; declaratory relief that his continued imprisonment violates his “clearly established” rights under the “Fourth, Fifth, Eighth, Ninth, … The purpose of mandamus is to enforce rights that have been clearly established. Silo v. Commonwealth, 886 A.2d 1193, 1195 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2005).

T. Lee v. Philadelphia Housing Auth.

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · May 5, 2025

[Appellees] filed Preliminary Objections in the nature of a motion to dismiss pursuant to Pa.R.Civ.P. 233.1, demurrer, lack of standing, and sovereign immunity. … As evidenced by Judge Davis’s opinion and order dismissing all state and federal claims, as well as her appeal to the Third Circuit, she clearly has. See Coulter v. Ramsden, 94 A.3d 1080, 1088 (Pa. Super. 2014).

Riley v. Workers' Compensation Appeal Board

997 A.2d 382 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Jun 17, 2010

Rather, the specific arguments raised by Claimant were that Employer was not entitled to an offset because she did not believe the disability annuity she was receiving qualified as a pension as referenced in Section 204 of … Section 1926 of the Statutory Construction Act of 1972,1 Pa.C.S. § 1926, provides that “[n]o statute shall be construed to be retroactive unless clearly and manifestly so intended by the General Assembly.”

Blount v. Philadelphia Parking Authority

920 A.2d 215 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 9, 2007

Furthermore, in Gory, in determining the status of the Philadelphia Housing Authority (PHA), “[o]ur Supreme Court established the criteria by which we determine whether an entity is a commonwealth agency.” Banacol Mktg. … Philadelphia Housing Authority, 466 Pa. 493 , 353 A.2d 800 (1976),] where the entity acts throughout the state and under the state’s control, it is clearly meant to be a Commonwealth agency for jurisdictional purposes so

Appeal of G.S., a Minor From the Decision by the Rose Tree Media S.D.

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Jan 7, 2022

A litany of evidence and testimony was adduced at these hearings, which established, in an unrebutted fashion, that G.S.’ … targeted at a member or members of their school community or clearly pertained to school activities.21 See Mahanoy Area Sch.

R. Garcia v. P. Howell

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Aug 23, 2019

Without expert testimony to establish the required standard of care and causation, Garcia’s claim for medical negligence must fail. … However, when the Civil Rules for professional negligence claims are viewed and read in their entirety, I believe that the Majority’s reliance on the Official Note to Rule 1042.3 is clearly misplaced.

Malt Beverages Distributors Ass'n v. Pennsylvania Liquor Control Board

965 A.2d 1269 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Feb 23, 2009

Dunham testified, in his years of experience studying retail establishments, he found that similar retail establishments often locate together to enhance all of their businesses. … It noted the proposed licensed area would be clearly separated from the unlicensed portions of the premises by four-foot high barriers.

City of Philadelphia v. T. Phan and DMB Investments, LLC

148 A.3d 962 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 24, 2016

There, we established a multi-factor test for courts to utilize in determining whether a property is non-vacant. Id. … The amounts represented on the letters do not establish the amounts paid by either DMB or CB to improve the Property.