Case law

D. Jennings v. UCBR

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Sep 7, 2018

Before the most recent amendment in 2016, a claimant had to earn at least 49.5% of her qualifying wages in the quarters outside the highest quarter of her base year. … However, the Department’s determination mailed to Claimant on May 8, 2016 clearly stated that her benefit year would run from May 1, 2016 through April 29, 2017. C.R., Item #11 at 9.

S. Ashby v. SEPTA

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Apr 5, 2018

Following argument, the trial court denied SEPTA’s motion, qualified Widas as an expert,8 and allowed him to testify without restrictions. Id. at 114. … Rather, an abuse of discretion requires a result of manifest unreasonableness, partiality, prejudice, bias, or ill-will, or such lack of support as to be clearly erroneous. Id. The trial court’s Pa.

E.M. O'Brien v. PA HFA

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Apr 18, 2016

Analysis In order to qualify for a HEMAP loan, a homeowner must show he meets the eligibility criteria in Act 91. Coyne v. Pa. Hous. Fin. … Further, the Agency’s interpretation of Act 91 is entitled to great weight and may only be overturned if such construction is clearly erroneous. Horton v. Pa. Hous. Fin. Agency, 511 A.2d 917 (Pa.

Com. of PA, Dept. of L&I, WC Office of Adjudication v. SCSC (McCormick)

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Jul 8, 2021

However, this discretion is qualified in that “just cause must be merit-related and the criteria must touch upon [the employee’s] competency and ability in some rational and logical manner.” Wei v. … The record clearly established that Judge McCormick committed numerous violations of the Code of Ethics for WCJs set forth in Section 1404(a) of the Workers’ Compensation Act (Act), 77 P.S. § 2504(a),1 as well as other standards

R.A. Spradlin v. UCBR

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Aug 16, 2019

The Trade Act established several federal programs to provide benefits to American workers adversely affected by foreign imports. … Section 236(a) of the Trade Act states that, if an adversely affected worker qualifies, “the Secretary shall approve [] training for the worker.

T. Lawson v. PA. DOC

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Jun 21, 2023

As the DOC Respondents correctly observe, a writ of mandamus is an extraordinary remedy, the purpose of which is not to establish legal rights, but to enforce those rights already established beyond question. Africa v. … Further, Lawson maintains there was no harm from any alleged service defect, as the Attorney General clearly learned of and responded to the Petition in any event.

K. Davis v. PA DOC

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 6, 2020

He also asserted that Smith was not qualified to make such an evaluation because Smith lacked any relevant medical training and, thus, was not capable of determining whether Davis was being provided with appropriate medical … “For a preliminary injunction to issue, every 8 one of these prerequisites must be established; if the [party seeking the preliminary injunction] fails to establish any one

R. Swede, Admin. of the Estate of T.A. Kelly v. B. Layton, CRNP ~ Appeal of: DOT

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Sep 10, 2024

The Estate rejoins that DOT cannot meet the three-pronged test that is necessary to establish a collateral order for the purpose of permitting an appeal. See Rule 313. … Clearly, Sections 1518(d) and 1519(b) of the Vehicle Code, 75 Pa.C.S. §§ 1518(d) and 1519(b), make the medical reports at issue confidential and provide that they “may not be divulged to any person.”

S. Voynow v. UCBR

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Sep 25, 2020

Claimant filed a claim for benefits effective October 21, 2018, thereby establishing a base year of July 1, 2017 through June 20, 2018. … The referee found that Claimant did not qualify as an employee of Anderson and, thus, excluded Claimant’s earnings from Anderson from the calculations.

A.E. MacTaggart v. Com. of PA

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · May 26, 2021

Taxpayer filed Petitions for Review in this Court, contending that his “private unprivileged earnings” did not qualify as income for purposes of Pennsylvania law. Citing the Department’s regulation at 61 Pa. … Taxpayer’s Exceptions and brief in support thereof fail to establish any error in this Court’s October 19, 2020 Opinion.

UnitedHealthcare of PA, Inc. v. DHS

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Apr 10, 2018

In turn, “clarify” is defined as “to explain clearly,” to “make understandable,” or “to make less complex or less ambiguous.” … We conclude that Peoples’ Petition clearly sets forth the matter for our appellate review; therefore, we must sustain the demurrer.

B. Moody v. M. Wenerowicz, former Deputy of the DOC

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · May 31, 2023

If no personal involvement is averred, the public employee is immune from suit. DuBree, 393 A.2d at 296. … Moody clearly attempted to rely on respondeat superior to establish his claims, alleging, for example, that “each [Appellee] had the authority to either relinquish and/or direct [his or her] subordinates to relinquish the

Comwlth of PA, DOC, SCI at Rockview v. SCSC (Barnes)

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 27, 2019

Nevertheless, the Commission determined that “clearly, there was a misunderstanding.” Commission Adjudication at 24. … Barnes did not have the requisite time in for FMLA or SPF leave and did not qualify for leave donations.

City of Philadelphia v. L. Thompson (WCAB)

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 19, 2025

Guidotti was more qualified to testify in light of the many articles he had published on the issue of cancer in firefighting service. Further, Dr. … The Supreme Court instructed that “epidemiological evidence is clearly relevant and useful” at this first stage of litigation to the extent it “can provide insight into whether the agent can cause the disease.” Id.

A. Feldman and Kim Manufacturing Company Stewart Hall, L.P. ~ Appeal of: A. Feldman

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Apr 18, 2016

The organization may lease open space lands to the developer or other qualified person or corporation for operation and maintenance of open space lands . . . . 7 The Agreement … Objector asserts that the instant easements are clearly alienations or restrictions on park land within the purview of the DDPA. See Assalita v. Chestnut Ridge Homeowners Association, 866 A.2d 1214 (Pa.

Merck Sharp & Dohme, LLC v. N. Williams (WCAB)

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 23, 2025

Kerrigan was qualified as an expert in the field of neurology, and she testified that she regularly treats patients with concussions, FNSD, and post- traumatic headaches. (R.R. at 54a-56a.) Dr. … Kerrigan clearly testified how FNSD is generally understood and accepted by neurologists and why she believed, within a reasonable degree of medical certainty, Claimant suffered from that disorder due to the work incident

Com. of PA v. E.P. Stilp

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 5, 2023

Paper is clearly in the definition of “Rubbish” contained in the Ordinance. … Here, [the city’s] efforts to protect public health and safety are clearly within the city’s police powers.”).

S. Conrad v. DOT (WCAB)

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Feb 26, 2024

However, the WCJ noted that Claimant is not qualified to render a medical opinion. … It is well established that the WCJ is the factfinder, and it is solely for the WCJ to assess credibility and to resolve conflicts in the evidence. Hawbaker v.

C.D.B. v. UCBR

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 7, 2019

As this Court explained, “without further elaboration from the physician who filled out the certification, for example, there is simply no evidence from a qualified person concerning the relationship between the mood disorder … Specifically, he failed to establish he could not control his statements at the time he made them.

J.R. Anthony, Sr. v. SCSC (Torrance State Hospital)

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 5, 2018

Appointing Authority responds that Petitioner’s testimony falls short of establishing a prima facie claim for discrimination and, even if he had established such a claim, it had merit-based, i.e., good cause, reasons for … See Henderson, 560 A.2d at 864 (holding that the petitioner established a prima facie case by presenting evidence that he was African American, was removed from a probationary position for which he was qualified, none of