Case law

R. Hall v. Det. B. Peters

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Nov 30, 2017

On the first day of the second trial, the defense impeached Primary Witness’ testimony with the 911 tape, wherein the operator asked him if he saw the shooter and he clearly answered no. … In addition, Plaintiff argues the trial court did not address Detective’s contention that he was immune from suit under the Tort Claims Act.

G. Levitsky & M. Levitsky h/w v. Wallingford-Swarthmore S.D.

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Apr 14, 2023

The trial court recognized that, 4 Section 8541 of what is commonly referred to as the Political Subdivision Tort Claims Act (Act) generally establishes governmental immunity for local agencies. 42 Pa.C.S … Section 8542 of the Act provides several exceptions to governmental immunity. 42 Pa.C.S. § 8542.

Commonwealth, Office of Attorney General v. East Brunswick Township

980 A.2d 720 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Aug 21, 2009

If sewage sludge is applied to lands abutting a public road, the applicant or landowner must place clearly visible signs written in both English and Spanish at intervals of 50 feet along the road stating “WARNING” in red … Section IX of the 2008 Ordinance establishes the Township’s inspection rights.

Crystal Forest Associates, LP v. Buckingham Township Supervisors

872 A.2d 206 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 16, 2005

As stated by this Court: It is well established that a zoning ordinance is presumed to be valid, and that therefore, one who challenges the validity of the zoning ordinance has a heavy burden of establishing its invalidity … That is clearly not the situation here.

Pennsylvania State Ass'n of Jury Commissioners v. Commonwealth

53 A.3d 109 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Jul 26, 2012

Supreme Court also rejected the proffered defense that all the provisions related to the subject of “municipalities:” [A]s virtually all of local government is a ‘municipality,’ we find that proposed subject too broad to qualify … Our Supreme Court set forth the burden associated with a claim that legislation failed to satisfy the requirement that the subject of a bill be clearly expressed in the title of a bill.

J.F. Brucker v. UCBR

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Dec 10, 2024

2021, the UC service center issued a notice of determination advising Claimant that he was ineligible for UC benefits because he “is unable to perform any type of work at all due to his health condition” and “in order to qualify … Claimant presented an explanation and evidence to establish that his appeal from the notice of determination had been timely. Id. at 66-69.

In re: Appeal of D. Auerbach ~ Appeal of: D. J. Auerbach

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · May 6, 2025

[Section 5-1104 of the Charter] clearly provides that the public’s right to inspection is not absolute and must be qualified by legally recognized privileges, one of which is the deliberative process privilege.” … The framers of the Charter saw fit to qualify the public right to inspection, however.

Mbda v. Plcb

966 A.2d 1188 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 2, 2009

Dunham testified, in his years of experience studying retail establishments, he found 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.

Philadelphia County DHS v. DHS

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Jul 2, 2025

Norrell Atkinson, the treating physician and a qualified expert in child abuse pediatrics, evaluated and treated Child at the hospital. (Id. ¶¶ 10-11.) During the hospital visit, Mother reported to Dr. … In my view, this record clearly and convincingly evidences Mother’s insufficient actions or omissions. Mother knew of the risk after she removed a pill from Child’s mouth.

In Re: Appeal of Springfield Hospital ~ Appeal of: Prospect Crozer, LLC

179 A.3d 632 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Feb 13, 2018

Given the sale of the property to a for-profit entity, the Taxing Authorities believed the property no longer qualified as tax exempt. … Clearly, the PILOT Order addressed the property’s tax exempt status and in no way expressly modified the tax assessment day rule or declared when taxes would be due.

Borough of Olyphant v. Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission

861 A.2d 377 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Nov 10, 2004

The former is clearly within the PUC’s exclusive jurisdiction. … This authority clearly applies to all PPL retail *387 customers located within the industrial park.

In re Nomination Petition of Cooper

643 A.2d 717 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Apr 18, 1994

We held that maintaining a room in a house and sometimes sleeping there does not establish domicile. Id. … Section 12 of the Code, 25 P.S. § 2868, states: Each signer of a nomination petition shall ... declare therein that he is a qualified elector of ... the political district therein named_ He shall add his occupation and residence

A. Johnson v. J. Wetzel, Secretary PA DOC

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Dec 23, 2021

There, we held Johnson’s “negligence” claim was based on intentional conduct and, therefore, barred by sovereign immunity. Johnson I, slip op. at 11-12. … immunity.

In Re Municipal Reapportionment of Tp.

873 A.2d 821 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Apr 29, 2005

established in the Pennsylvania and U.S. … In this second action, Biswanger was joined by four commissioners and twelve electors in the Township purporting to represent 1,477 qualified electors and residents of Haverford whose signatures appeared on "Exhibit A,” which

Mellow v. Pizzingrilli

800 A.2d 350 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · May 15, 2002

Therefore, Representatives in the General Assembly will be elected in 2002 from the districts established following the 2000 census. … Moreover, we conclude that a plain reading of the amendment itself as well as the Plain English Statement clearly puts electors on notice that adoption of the amendment would result in shortened terms where applicable.

J. Robins v. Sec'y. Harry

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Aug 26, 2025

Allowing Petitioner’s proposed amendment to add two completely unrelated counts to his Amended PFR, more than two years after the Original PFR was filed, is clearly prejudicial to Respondents who have already responded both … (DOC’s Amended POs, at 12).14 Pennsylvania’s constitution establishes the right to appeal to an appellate court.

Com. of PA v. J.T. Redovan

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Feb 18, 2020

The facts were not in serious dispute and I ruled that they established [Redovan’s] guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. … It asserts that Redovan was clearly aware of the presence of the corn and that Redovan’s tree stand was in close proximity to and in view of the location where the corn was found.

In re: River Valley S.D. ~ Appeal of: B. Caranese

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Dec 17, 2024

In In re Establishment of Representation of Cameron County School Board by 9 Directors Elected at Large, 456 A.2d 226 (Pa. … If our General Assembly intended to create such a standard, it could have, and would have, said so more clearly. Further, the Majority’s resort to dictionary definitions is unpersuasive.

Gruzinski v. Department of Public Welfare

731 A.2d 246 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Jun 7, 1999

The Act establishes the eligibility criteria in section 473(a)(2) as the sole criteria. It does not set forth the listed criteria as minimums or as examples of eligibility criteria. … While the Final Order containing that opinion, in the form of two paragraphs may not be as verbose as other opinions tend to be, it does clearly contain the legal reasoning for the decision. .

Keister Miller Invs. LLC v. Workers' Comp. Appeal Bd.

184 A.3d 1039 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 23, 2018

The public policy goal is to establish uniform awards for similar types of disfigurements. … However, at the same time, the Board and this Court have clearly recognized that State Board Commissioners alone have access to this information, whereas the WCJs do not.