Case law

S.C. Alexander v. Mt. Joy Twp.

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Jan 9, 2026

Improper Joinder of Parties That [Appellant] is aware that each of the Supervisors and their Roadmaster are in fact stripped of their immunity and face personal liability as a … While these amendments do not strictly comply with Pa.R.Civ.P. 1028(c)(1) in that they are not a separate filing of an amended complaint, the PO Response and Second Praecipe clearly evidence Appellant’s intent and attempt

L.A. Carpenter v. Family Dollar Stores of PA, LLC (WCAB)

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Jan 14, 2022

Bennett is a neurologist, he is also a medical physician who is qualified to render opinions on medical conditions such as knee pain, orthopedic injuries, and shoulder and back strains. See, e.g., Baumann v. … Bennett clearly testified that Claimant recovered from all her physical, work-related injuries, and that he clearly testified that he disagreed with Dr. Feinstein’s conclusions. Employer further argues that Dr.

AES Drilling Fluids, LLC v. Clearfield County TCB

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Jun 9, 2025

states that a claim cannot be made absolute until the January “following the notice hereinbefore prescribed” in Section 308(a), which presupposes the validity of that notice, and because Section 314(e) of the RETSL does not qualify … These notices, which were sent to the McKinney address, clearly did not go to the proper Houston address of AES’s current tax agent. Id.

E.A. Snyder, Jr. v. UCBR

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Feb 8, 2018

Thus, the referee determined that Claimant failed to establish a necessitous and compelling reason for leaving his employment and was ineligible for unemployment benefits under Section 402(b). … However, this matter is clearly distinguishable from Fitzgerald.

L. Durbin v. WCAB (PA Hospital of the University of PA Health System)

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Nov 21, 2016

Rieger diagnosed Claimant with post-traumatic stress disorder qualified as “a major devastating emotional reaction and severe adjustment disorder with anxiety and depression.” … Here, the record and the WCJ’s findings of fact clearly demonstrate that the outcome would not have changed had the WCJ placed the burden of proof on Employer. The WCJ found Dr.

Stadium Casino RE, LLC v. PA Gaming Control Bd.

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Feb 8, 2023

The Gaming Act established an independent agency of the Commonwealth known as the Board. See Petition ¶ 20; see also 4 Pa.C.S. § 1201. … It tests the legal sufficiency of the challenged pleadings and will be sustained only in cases where the pleader has clearly failed to state a claim for which relief can be

Com. (Borough of Palmyra) v. R.U. Brandt

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Aug 25, 2017

The Court further stated that “[a]t common law, witnesses not qualifying as experts were generally permitted to testify regarding those things that they had seen, heard, felt, tasted, smelled, or done.” Id. … Clearly, [the landowner] was not maintaining his property in a clean, safe, and sanitary condition.” MacQuarrie, slip op. at 4 (citation omitted).

Borough of Honesdale v. M.C. Morris & S.G. Smith

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 11, 2019

As for the mechanics of the grant, “SMH was required to provide [the Borough] with invoices for qualifying expenses. Upon receipt of those invoices, [the Borough] was required to send DCED reimbursement requests. … be found merely because an appellate court might have reached a different conclusion, but requires a result of manifest unreasonableness, or partiality, prejudice, bias, or ill-will, or such lack of support so as to be clearly

Eastern York S.D. v. Lower Windsor Twp. ZHB & Lower Windsor Twp. ~ Appeal of: Lower Windsor Twp.

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Dec 5, 2024

The Township argues that the Board correctly found, in the absence of unique physical features or circumstances beyond the slopes or clearly arbitrary action.”); Tidd v. Lower Saucon Twp. … Section 312.E.1 does not qualify the term “steep slopes” as defined in Ordinance Section 470-6 and makes no distinction between manmade and natural slopes.

Com. of PA v. J.M. DeMaske

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Nov 16, 2022

Did the [trial c]ourt permit Deputy Game Warden Bonin and Deputy Game Warden King to give expert testimony 6  without these witnesses being qualified … Did the Commonwealth fail to establish a prima facie case? 5.

J. Fremont, Ph.D. v. BPOA, State Board of Psychology

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Jun 17, 2021

Actual injury to a client need not be established. 63 P.S. § 1208(a)(11). 13 The transcript pages of the September 5, 2018 portion of the hearing are numbered 1 through 157. … Accordingly, regardless of Judge Hughes’ compliance or noncompliance with Pennsylvania Rule of Civil Procedure No. 1915.18, we find that the express language of the June 2013 Order clearly directed Dr.

J. Robinson, t/d/b/a PSU KnowHow v. L&I, Office of Unemployment Tax Svcs.

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 31, 2016

order of the Department of Labor and Industry (Department) denying its petition for reassessment regarding unemployment compensation contributions and interest on the basis that from 2009–2013, Petitioner qualified … Customary Engagement in an Independently Established Trade, Occupation, Profession or Business Finally, as we established in Minelli v.

M. Osbourne, M.D. & the City of Philadelphia Office of the Medical Examiner v. J.M. Greenberg

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Sep 13, 2023

Such hypothetical events fail to establish a real or concrete controversy. … The party must demonstrate a “sufficiently close causal connection between the challenged action and the asserted injury to qualify the interest as ‘immediate’ rather than ‘remote.’”

C. Steiner v. WCAB (Automatic Brewers & Coffee)

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Aug 1, 2019

However, we have repeatedly explained that, “[a]n expert medical witness in a workers’ compensation proceeding is qualified to testify outside of his medical specialty, and any objection to that testimony goes to the weight … while discrediting Claimant’s testimony regarding his alleged October (continued…) decision containing findings of fact and conclusions of law based upon the evidence as a whole which clearly

City of Philadelphia v. WCAB (Moore)

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Apr 20, 2017

He is medically qualified to perform unrestricted duty.” (R.R. at 59, 86.) … The present case is clearly distinguishable from Newcomer. There, claimant’s description of injury changed during the course of the litigation, as did his description of his symptoms. Id. at 1064-65.

Protect PT v. Penn Twp. ZHB & Olympus Energy LLC

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Jul 6, 2020

established limit of disturbance shall be situated at the access road entrance. … Clearly, those cases, which involved constitutional challenges, are distinguishable in that this case does not involve a constitutional or substantive validity challenge.

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

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Aug 13, 2019

PVP was fully qualified to complete the work, had performed work for the Authority on prior occasions, and continually informed representatives of the Authority that the work was … Notably, although the trial court did not use the words “fraudulent concealment” in its opinion, the trial court clearly applied the doctrine in theory. 2 See also Amodeo v.

Clinton Properties, Inc. & Pioneer Aggregates, Inc. v. Fell Twp. ZHB & Fell Twp.

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Feb 3, 2026

It was asserted that the production of the product for placement in the Pre-Act pit qualified the use as an act of reclamation as required by the above identified mining statutes and was … In Hoffman, 32 A.3d at 591, our Supreme Court stated that “the General Assembly must clearly evidence its intent to preempt.” Id.

Spear Products, Inc. v. Springfield Twp.

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Nov 19, 2025

The applicant bears the burden of establishing that the proposed conditional use satisfies the specific criteria in the zoning ordinance. Id. … (Roth) of McMahon Associates, who the Board found qualified as an expert in the field of traffic engineering, prepared the trip generation report and TIS Applicant produced in support of its Application.

G.M. Kelly-Pimentel, Ph.D. v. SCSC (DOC)

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Feb 1, 2017

Smeal stated that she ranked Fazio first because Fazio best identified with the goals of the Bureau of Corrections Education and was better qualified due to her experience as a Staff Assistant. … With regard to technical discrimination based on preselection, Petitioner contends that the evidence presented clearly demonstrates that the 4 Petitioner does not challenge any of the Commission’s factual