Case law

B.K. v. Department of Public Welfare

36 A.3d 649 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Feb 1, 2012

Clearly, whatever the mother’s intention, the smoking of the cocaine in the car was intentional. Further, ... Dr. … Nevertheless, the impairment he did sustain qualifies as “a serious physical injury” under § 6303 of the [Law].

A. Diop v. BPOA, State Board of Cosmetology of The Com. of PA

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 3, 2022

The alleged harm to Henry is speculative, and Petitioners have not presented facts to establish her direct and immediate interest in asserting an as- applied challenge. … We agree with Respondents that Petitioners have not demonstrated that the Law, on its face, clearly violates the Pennsylvania Constitution.

Rubin v. Fox

60 A.3d 179 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Nov 19, 2012

The hearing officer also noted that Riley was supposed to be acting as preceptor for Fox during the incident, but that there was clearly a lack of supervision over Fox at that time, as Fox administered the drug without anyone … Rubin failed to meet his burden with regard to establishing that the withdrawal of Fox’s MCA was proper. (Id. at 637a-38a.) Next, the hearing officer addressed whether Dr.

Com., Dept. of Gen. Serv. v. Min. Prod.

927 A.2d 717 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Jul 3, 2007

Clearly, this language does not suggest PCBs are defective as a matter of law or that no two reasonable persons could disagree as to defect. … "According to the independent consultants, levels this low are difficult to detect." * * * "The experts have clearly established that the trace of this chemical compound are well contained, are not in areas of public use,

The City of Clairton, PA v. ZHB of the City of Clairton, PA, & Cornerstone Residence, Inc.

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Feb 4, 2021

Cornerstone argues that the trial court correctly determined that the proposed use qualified as a single-family use. … Because the Ordinance very clearly states that the restrictions in the definition of family will not apply to those who are disabled/handicapped under the Fair Housing Act, the restriction against five unrelated persons living

Somerset Area S.D. v. Rockwood Area S.D.

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · May 5, 2023

See In re Establishment of Indep. [Sch.] Dist. of Wheatland, 846 A.2d 771 (Pa. [Cmwlth.] 2004). … exceptional circumstances such as where there has been an intervening change in the controlling law, a substantial change in the facts or evidence giving rise to the dispute in the matter, or where the prior holding was clearly

J. Mercer v. Active Radiator MPN, Inc. (WCAB)

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Jun 3, 2024

Mercer was exposed to lead while working for Employer and clearly believed (WCJ’s emphasis) that his current issues were due to that exposure, but his evidence failed to establish lead toxicity or that his current asserted … Silverman’s acknowledgement that returning Mercer to a lead-oriented environment would not be recommended was expressly qualified by his statement that the reason was not because of an actual threat due to further exposure

Budd Co. v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal Board

144 Pa. Commw. 533 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Jan 7, 1992

Though pure mistakes of fact and law clearly remain within the standard, see e.g., Reed v. … Section 306(c) [7] of the Act establishes the maximum compensation for disfigurement of the head.

S. Porter v. PA DOS

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Jul 29, 2020

With respect to that immunity, we have noted that “the Commonwealth government and its various agencies and officers are separate entities and that ‘the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, itself, which is clearly not a Commonwealth … agency, still enjoys absolute immunity pursuant to 1 Pa.

Associacion De Puertorriquenos En Marcha, Inc. v. Department of Health, Division of Drug & Alcohol Program Licensure

931 A.2d 752 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Jun 7, 2007

Clearly, DOH’s determinations are supported by substantial evidence. … We discern no error in DOH’s determination that APM’s Director qualifies as a person "performing the activities necessary for the operation of the facility.” Id.

Moore v. COM., DEPT. OF TRANSP.

19 A.3d 1200 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · May 4, 2011

Indeed, one who seeks to obtain or retain that status, while disclaiming the obligation to know that a license is valid for only four years and is not valid without a signature, undermines the premise that he "is qualified … We explained "good cause" is established "where the action of the employee is justifiable or reasonable under the circumstances." Id. at 1015 (citation omitted).

HIKO Energy, LLC v. Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission

163 A.3d 1079 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Jun 8, 2017

As [PUC] Commissioner Brownell stated, ‘the statute did not establish a ‘heads I win, tails you lose’ construct.’ … To do that, HIKO asserts, I & E could have served written discovery to establish what the entries meant.

International Ass'n of Firefighters Local 1400 v. City of Chester

991 A.2d 1001 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 22, 2010

If the parties intended the parity provision *1009 to carry forward past 2006, they would not have used the qualifier, “(2003-2006)” in the language, “Effective January 1 of each successive year of this Agreement (2003-2006 … Under narrow certiorari review, the test for determining whether the arbitrator acted in excess of his powers is not whether the *1012 arbitrator’s decision is unwise, clearly unreasonable, burdens the taxpayer, is against

J. Salih v. County of Allegheny Office of D.A.

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Jan 23, 2020

Cmwlth. 1997) (“Rule 302(a) clearly states that issues not raised in the trial court are waived and cannot be raised for the first time on appeal.”). … the appellant] cannot establish an essential element needed to make a cause of action for false arrest.”

N. Finnerty v. PA DCED

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Apr 25, 2019

Thus, the record clearly establishes a contractual relationship between the Department and EConsult, McNees, and Fairmount for the purposes of implementing, pursuant to Act 47, the Recovery Plan. … The evidence established that there was a contract between the Department, EConsult, McNees, and Fairmount.

Electors of the City of York v. M. Helfrich, Mayor of the City of York ~ Appeal of: H. Nixon

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Feb 26, 2024

self-executing where the vacancy is incontrovertible or stipulated, for example, where the elected official dies before taking his oath, the elected official does not dispute that there is a vacancy, or the elected official is clearly … office, they were required to (1) prove they had standing to file quo warranto action by demonstrating that both the Attorney General and the York County District Attorney declined to bring a quo warranto action; and (2) establish

W.R. Hoy v. Borough of Cochranton

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Dec 21, 2016

establish pretext simply by showing that she is more qualified than the person hired. … When two candidates are equally qualified in that they both possess the objective qualifications for the position and neither is clearly better qualified, it is within the employer’s

N. Finnerty v. PA DCED

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Apr 25, 2019

Thus, the record clearly establishes a contractual relationship between the Department and EConsult, McNees, and Fairmount for the purposes of implementing, pursuant to Act 47, the Recovery Plan. … The evidence established that there was a contract between the Department, EConsult, McNees, and Fairmount.

Schmader Ex Rel. Schmader v. Warren County School District

808 A.2d 596 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 9, 2002

It is well established that it is fundamental to due process that a statute or regulation must not be so vague as to require persons of ordinary intelligence to guess at its meaning or its possible application. … Clearly, the protected right to an education in 22 Pa.Code § 12.8(a) is the guarantee that a student will not be denied classroom instruction without due process.

Tyrone Fire Patrol Co. v. Tyrone Borough

92 A.3d 79 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 21, 2014

Any final order, decree, decision, determination or ruling by an agency affecting personal or property rights, privileges, immunities, duties, liabilities or obligations of any or all of the parties to the proceeding in which … Clearly, precedent has established that local agency employees only have the right to a hearing pursuant to the Local Agency Law when they can establish that dismissal affects a personal or property right, specifically a