Case law

H.L. Salgado Bahena v. UCBR

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Jun 17, 2025

The Board determined the following: Here, [Claimant] did not prove that he qualified for [UC] benefits under the follow-the-spouse doctrine. … Here, Claimant has clearly met this first criteria. The Board found that Claimant could not afford to support two households. (F.F. No. 10.)

J. Esch v. PA Public School Employees' Retirement Board

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Nov 22, 2024

for Out-of-State Service We begin by observing that the Board is charged with executing and applying the Code, and its interpretation of its provisions should not be overturned unless such construction is clearly … Additionally, Claimant has established no rational connection between her inability to purchase PSERS credit and any burden on interstate commerce.

Caln Nether Co., L.P. v. Board of Supervisors

840 A.2d 484 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Jan 8, 2004

It defines store as “a business establishment where usu[ally] diversified goods are kept for retail sale.” Id. at 1156. … Accordingly, the [Supervisors discredit] the allegations of bias and find[] both members fully qualified to sit in judgment of this proceeding.

League of Women Voters of Pennsylvania v. The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Feb 9, 2018

Whereas the chief executive privilege relates to the Governor, the executive and deliberative process privileges potentially available to executive branch officials, in general, are more narrow and qualified than the chief … that “[i]t was held more than eighty years ago by this court, under the present Constitution, that the Governor is exempt from the process of the courts whenever engaging in any duty pertaining to his office and that his immunity

Resources for Human Development, Inc. and Gallagher Bassett Services v. S. Dixon (WCAB)

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Dec 20, 2023

provides, in pertinent part: All parties to an adjudicatory proceeding are entitled to a reasoned decision containing findings of fact and conclusions of law based upon the evidence as a whole which clearly … Employer’s argument appears to be that, for her work for Public Partnerships to qualify as concurrent employment, Claimant had to work both positions on the day the injury occurred.

J.D. Mellott v. Dept. of L&I, Bureau of Occupational & Industrial Safety

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Aug 19, 2021

There is no exception provided for those who are well qualified, no matter how many years of experience or continuing education units they have. … Moreover, the hearing examiner clearly rejected Petitioner’s argument that the Bureau improperly treated his 2019 Certification Application as a renewal application.

InGenesis, Inc. v. DGS

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · May 8, 2026

While that was clearly not the case, [Petitioner] also does not provide any factual information regarding its allegation that 22nd Century is not qualified. .... 6 … The RFP does not establish a 9 time certain and notably states the debriefing will “not toll the time for filing a protest.” Id.

D.D. Ritter v. Lehigh County Bd. of Elections

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Jan 3, 2022

All of the 261 ballots were signed and cast by qualified electors and received timely by the Board. … The presence of the date also establishes a point in time against which to measure the elector’s eligibility to cast the ballot[.]

Jacob Doyle Corman, III, individually and as a parent of two minor school children v. Acting Secretary of the Pennsylvania Department of Health

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Nov 10, 2021

Instead, directly following the “any other disease control measure” language is the qualifying language “for the surveillance of disease.” 28 Pa. Code § 27.60(a). … It is true that the mere possession of discretionary power by an administrative body does not make it wholly immune from judicial review, but the scope of that review is limited

E. Diaz v. 12th Judicial District

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Sep 20, 2021

Judicial District and the Prison Board to transfer management of the DCWRC to the Prison Board; (6) the Prison Board to take back control of the DCWRC; (7) the Prison Board to assign its Director of Corrections, or another qualified … Finally, Respondents contend that all parties named by Diaz are protected from such claims under sovereign immunity. A.

Borough of Hollidaysburg v. P. Detwiler (WCAB)

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Nov 19, 2024

[C]laimant never clearly testified when the training occurred. … The Borough submits that although Claimant was qualified as a firefighter by training, the testimony of Assistant Chief Schmitt and Chief DiBona established that “Claimant was not the traditional firefighter that one might

Global TelLink Corp. v. Department of Corrections

109 A.3d 809 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Feb 6, 2015

The RFP stated that the sole point of contact was-the Issuing Officer and that the Department would notify in writing the offeror “whose proposal is determined to be the most advantageous” by a committee of qualified personnel … Corizon has failed to establish that the Deputy Secretary’s procedural decisions were prohibited by the Procurement Code or constituted an abuse of discretion.”). 19 Accordingly, the Department’s order is affirmed.

United Refining Co. v. Department of Environmental Protection

163 A.3d 1125 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Jun 12, 2017

It must be sufficient to satisfy an unprejudiced mind as to the existence of the factual scenario sought to be established.” … Branch, an experienced oil and gas operator, who also was qualified as an expert, testified as to his drilling plan and about the many wells he has drilled without incident in this locale.

Green Construction Co. v. Department of Transportation

164 Pa. Commw. 566 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Jun 7, 1994

Where, as here, it has been established that through no fault or misrepresentation by DOT a contractor has encountered difficulties in execution of the contract requirements due solely to the contractor’s own preparations … The Uniform Business Records as Evidence Act, 42 Pa.C.S. § 6108(b), provides: (b) General Rule. — A record of an act, condition or event shall, insofar as relevant, be competent evidence if the custodian or other qualified

National Ass'n of Forensic Counselors v. State Board of Social Workers

814 A.2d 815 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Jan 2, 2003

[Petitioner] certifies individuals who specialize in addictions counseling rather than individual who would be qualified to practice the entire spectrum of professional counseling ... (Board opinion, p. 5). … Further, every reasonable presumption in favor of a statute’s validity must be made and only if it clearly appears that it. cannot be supported can it be held invalid. Willcox v.

R.S. Martin v. J.M. Blake

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 23, 2020

First, it found the claim would be barred by what is commonly known as the Sovereign Immunity Act, 42 Pa.C.S. § 8522, as the claim does not fall within any of the enumerated exceptions to immunity. … Appellant argues the trial court erred in dismissing his Complaint as frivolous under Rule 240(j)(1) because Defendants clearly violated the dissemination provisions of CHRIA.

Lower Makefield Township v. Lands of Dalgewicz

4 A.3d 1114 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Sep 1, 2010

. § 1105, provides that the testimony of a qualified valuation may include “[t]he price and other terms of any sale or contract to sell the condemned property.” … This Court will not hold as a matter of law that the trial court erred when it clearly considered the soundness and legitimacy of the Pulte Letter of Intent in conjunction with the other evidence of contemporaneous offers

J.S. Ex Rel. H.S. v. Bethlehem Area School District

757 A.2d 412 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Jul 14, 2000

Therefore, conduct or expression of opinion, by the student, in class or out of it, that materially disrupts class work or involves substantial disorder *419 or invasion of the rights of others, is not immunized by the First … While we agree that the number 234 may not be an accurate number of students that viewed the site, it is clearly evident that the vast majority of hits came from other students.

City of Philadelphia v. R.T. Armstrong

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Feb 14, 2022

Cmwlth. 1978) (“We believe that this statute clearly preempts local governments from regulating the lawful ownership, possession and transportation of firearms.”). … More specifically, the City contended “that Section 6120’s qualifying phrase ‘when carried or transported’ leaves room for municipalities to regulate any uses of firearms which do not involve carrying or transporting them

Capaldi v. Workers' Compensation Appeal Board (City of Philadelphia)

152 A.3d 1107 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Jan 9, 2017

Keane is exceedingly well-qualified in that he is a board certified specialist in head and neck surgery, with a special interest and expertise in head and neck cancer, as … Conclusion Claimant’s medical evidence did not establish that squamous cell carcinoma is a type of cancer caused by Group 1 IARC carcinogens, and this was necessary in order to establish that his cancer is