Case law

In Re: Appeal of Hanna, T. ~ Appeal of: City of Phila

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Dec 19, 2018

In response, Taxpayer contends the trial court’s remand order clearly requires the exercise of administrative discretion and is therefore not appealable under Rule 311(f)(1). … A determination of the value of real estate clearly involves discretion. Nine Penn Ctr. (citing Ray v. City of Philadelphia, 25 A.2d 145 (Pa. 1942)).

Wage and Policy Committee of the City of Arnold Police Dept. v. City of Arnold, PA

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Aug 9, 2019

As a result, Article XVII should be drafted to more clearly reflect this requirement for officers hired on or after January 1, 1988 and the superannuation requirements for those … However, throughout its argument that its written notice was sufficient, the City omits any reference to the qualifying language set forth in its written statement of the issues, i.e., “in accordance with Section 1.13 of

R.C. v. Commissioner of the PA State Police, R. Evanchick

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 17, 2021

However, these offenses, while arguably not inherently sexual in nature, are qualifying offenses under Act 29 for purposes of requiring registration as a sexual offender. … The Supreme Court confirmed that, while the General Assembly establishes public policy, the “courts are empowered to enforce constitutional rights” where there is “a demonstration that [the policy] clearly, plainly, and palpably

R.J. Egizio v. Consol PA Coal Co., LLC (WCAB)

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Jul 27, 2023

Claimant retorted that a loss of earning power should not be established through Claimant’s testimony, but only through wage information that Employer had not yet provided.3 Id. at 10-11. … However, since the WCJ qualified his award of benefits by stating that they were to be paid only “to the extent [Claimant] had a wage loss,” we determined that any resulting error was “harmless.” Id.

Good Samaritan Hospital v. UCBR

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Jul 28, 2016

In determining that Employer failed to establish that it discharged Claimant for actions that constituted willful misconduct, the referee reasoned as follows: [T]he record establishes that the claimant sent … Moreover, we reject Claimant’s efforts to establish that his actions were justifiable or reasonable under the circumstances.

T. Wolf, Gov. of the Com. of PA v. General Assembly of the Com. of PA

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Apr 17, 2023

the members elected to each House, the Secretary of the Commonwealth shall cause the same again to be published in the manner aforesaid; and such proposed amendment or amendments shall be submitted to the qualified … Preliminary objections in the nature of a demurrer should be sustained only in cases that clearly and without a doubt fail to state a claim for which relief may be granted.” Yocum v. Pa.

PSP v. ACLU of PA

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · May 18, 2018

However, “as clearly suggested by Section 708(b)(2) of the RTKL itself, the agency’s burden does not include a requirement that the release of a record would definitely threaten or jeopardize public safety or protection.” … He explained the information was redacted because it would jeopardize PSP’s ability to hire qualified individuals and that disclosure would reveal the specific information that may be reviewed to determine whether a candidate

Solid Waste Services, Inc., d/b/a J.P. Mascaro & Sons v. WCAB (Boos)

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 31, 2021

that, in order to trigger the expression of autoimmunity, “the trauma needs to be significant enough or the medical process [must] be [] severe enough for the body to recognize itself as foreign and develop a significant immune … Where claimants “establish that they [are] unfit or unable to perform their duties when they return[ ] to work” by unequivocal medical testimony, ongoing disability can be established. Id.

G. Rimer-Klak v. Bureau of Driver Licensing

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · May 9, 2024

The trial court also opined that DOT waived its legal argument because it failed to object to, or clearly assert, the inapplicability of Commonwealth v. Chichkin, 232 A.3d 959 (Pa. … Here, [the l]icensee raised ARD, extrapolation evidence[,] and successive suspensions, as new reasons to support his privileges and immunities claim. Wert, 821 A.2d at 186 n.9.

B. Sephes v. Nationwide Housing Mgmt. & UEGF (WCAB)

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Jun 1, 2022

evidence established that his work-related L4 radiculopathy had not fully resolved. Following review, we affirm the Board. … Claimant’s medical records established that Claimant sustained a gunshot wound to his left upper abdomen and lower thoracic area. (Id.)

Dr. N.O. Brown v. PA Turnpike Commission

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Jan 7, 2019

Clearly, Condemnor possesses the power to condemn the property at issue under eminent domain procedures. … On voir dire examination, Condemnee qualified as an expert in veterinary medicine. N.T. at 95-101; R.R. at 248a-54a.

PASSHE, Lock Haven University v. APSCUF

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Aug 31, 2018

The testimony of Grievant’s Department Chair showed both that there was a demand for other professors to teach the 100-level courses in which high school students would generally enroll and that Grievant was qualified to … The burden of establishing a violation of public policy rests on the party asserting the public policy exception. Westmoreland Intermediate Unit # 7, 939 A.2d at 864.

Chester Upland S.D. & Chichester S.D. v. Delaware County Board of Assessment Appeals & City of Chester

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · May 17, 2023

Preliminary objections may be sustained when, based on the facts pled, it is clear that the plaintiff will be unable to establish a right to relief. … In each such Exemption Appeal, the property owners failed to offer evidence to establish their right to a tax exemption; nonetheless, the Board granted each an exemption.

R. Beck v. Fayette County Tax Claim Bureau & S. McCarty

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Nov 16, 2018

court erred in ordering restitution and disregarding this Court’s prior ruling, which invalidated 5 Our review in tax sale cases “is limited to determining whether the trial court abused its discretion, clearly … Otherwise, it is immune from damages.

T. Nesmith v. WCAB (SEPTA)

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Jan 8, 2016

The WCJ also concluded that Employer established that Claimant fully recovered from her August 14, 2011 work injury as of August 29, 2012, and granted Employer’s Termination Petition. (COL ¶ 4.) … The WCJ’s evidentiary findings are not, however, immune from review. “The WCJ must base its decision on substantial evidence.” 3 Id. The WCJ here found Dr.

T.A. White v. PA DOC

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 6, 2025

Title II of the ADA (relating to public services) provides, in relevant part, that “no qualified individual with a disability shall, by reason of such disability, be excluded from participation in or be denied the benefits … This is clearly correct, and to the extent the petition for review may be construed as a claim sounding in mandamus, it would be dismissed.

C. Carulli & B. Carulli, h&w v. N. Versailles Twp. Sanitary Auth. v. Port Vue Plumbing, Inc.

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 4, 2022

In making such assertions, the Dissent is clearly engaged in fact-finding contrary to that of the trial court. … (Port Vue) provide “As-Built” Drawings to the Authority clearly showing where the pipe bursting ended.

J. Drummond, alleged dependent of T. Drummond v. WCAB (Leadership Learning Partners)

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Nov 17, 2015

Considering the evidence of record in its totality and reviewing the evidence in a light most favorable to the Employer, this Court finds that the Board properly affirmed the WCJ’s decision, as the record before them clearly … established that the opinions and reports of Dr.

J. Conley & Sons Plumbing v. WCAB (Gainer)

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Sep 19, 2017

In affirming the grant of the modification petition, the Board acknowledged “the error in the WCJ’s finding that Claimant’s testimony and Affidavit spoke to his employment at Jiffy Lube when they clearly did not” and the … While the records of regularly conducted business activity fall within an exception to the hearsay rule,9 not every notation in a business record qualifies. 8 The record reflects that only counsel for Employer

S.A.J. Fultze v. PPB

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Dec 15, 2021

This order further provided that the Governor would “temporarily suspend the sentences of incarceration of those persons who qualify and comply with supervision requirements for such length of time as may be necessary to … We have also reiterated that, as a basic proposition, “nunc pro tunc relief [is] warranted where an administrative notice, on its face, [does] not clearly set forth the appellant’s appeal rights.” Farley v.