Case law

C. Cunningham v. UCBR

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Jan 24, 2025

In other words, penalty 18 Claimant testified that she returned to work with Employer part time in January or February of 2021 until, due to her compromised immune system and co-worker illnesses, her physician … The General Assembly also clearly intended to penalize claimants who have knowingly misused the UC system.

Jackson v. PORT AUTHORITY OF ALLEGHENY CTY.

17 A.3d 966 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 14, 2011

sufficient, of itself, to establish negligence in its operation. … PAT argues that had such a claim been made, it would be immune from liability as there is no exception to immunity for that. (PAT's Br. Summ. J. at 9-10, R.R. at 37a-38a.) 6 .

Kennedy v. Commonwealth

119 Pa. Commw. 24 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Aug 19, 1988

The Commonwealth contends that Petitioners’ complaint foils to state a cause of action and that the Commonwealth defendants are “immune by virtue of sovereign and official immunity from an order directing repayment with interest … One seeking to negate that presumption bears a heavy burden of persuasion and legislation will not be invalidated unless it clearly, palpably and plainly violates the Constitution. Id.

Tindell v. Department of Corrections

87 A.3d 1029 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 24, 2014

The purpose of mandamus is to enforce rights that have been clearly established. Silo v. Commonwealth, 886 A.2d 1193, 1195 (Pa.Cmwlth.2005). … Allegations that corrections officers have failed to follow rules and regulations promulgated or adopted by prison officials that do not also allege this failure has violated a clearly established statutory or constitutional

Lousil, Inc. v. Liquor Control Board

5 Pa. Commw. 33 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 21, 1972

The premises, which has been a licensed establishment since the repeal of prohibition, meets all of the physical requirements of the Liquor Code and regulations of the Liquor Control Board and the transferee is fully qualified … In short, Section 404 clearly and unequivocally now provides pertinently to this case that the Board must issue a restaurant license to a qualified person and for a qualified premises either originally or by transfer; provided

Ballroom, LLC v. Commonwealth

984 A.2d 582 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Nov 17, 2009

The Act defines a “public place” as “[a]n enclosed area which serves as a work place, commercial establishment or an area where the public is invited or permitted.” Section 2, 35 P.S. § 637.2. … The Act exempts certain facilities, such as a tobacco shop, a cigar bar, a private club and a drinking establishment, from the smoking ban. Section 3(b), 35 P.S. § 637.3(b).

Clark v. Unemployment Compensation Board of Review

129 A.3d 1272 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Dec 23, 2015

Rather, based upon our calculations, Claimant established that RDP Enterprises paid him $2,049.91 during that period.9 Thus, Claimant proved that between March 31, 2013 and March 30, 2014 he was paid $2,697.82, which clearly … The statutory wording clearly provides for the word ‘customarily’ to modify the word ‘engaged.’

Gernert v. LINDSAY

2 Pa. Commw. 576 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Aug 10, 1971

The commission read in part that such appointment would run “. . . for a term of four years, or until your successor shall have been duly appointed and qualified. ...” … then to determine if in fact, on the basis of *579 the “clearly pleaded” facts taken as true, plaintiff has made out such a cause of action in his complaint.

Kanzelmeyer v. Eger

16 Pa. Commw. 495 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Nov 27, 1974

funds by an agency or its acquisition, use or disposal of services or of supplies, materials, equipment or other property and any minute, order or decision by an agency fixing the personal or property rights, privileges, immunities … The instant record clearly establishes that the appellant would be unable to ascertain whether the district had paid its employees for unauthorized absences without access to the attendance record cards.

Senex Explosives, Inc. v. Commonwealth

58 A.3d 131 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Dec 19, 2012

An agency’s interpretation should not be overturned unless it is clearly erroneous. Id. As we recently held in R & R Express, and underscored in Southern Pines Trucking v. … First, Taxpayer cannot establish double taxation because its failure to comply with record-keeping requirements deprives it of acceptable proof of taxes paid for fuel ultimately consumed by qualifying vehicles alone.

Hamilton v. Hennessey

783 A.2d 852 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Aug 28, 2001

Annunzio, 468 F.2d 522 (7th Cir.1972), rejected the Speech and Debate Clause immunity protection in a franking case. … In holding that the Speech and Debate Clause did not immunize Senator Brewster from prosecution on federal bribery charges, the Supreme Court distinguished between Congressional conduct which is clearly part of the legislative

City of Pittsburgh v. Conley

126 Pa. Commw. 306 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Jun 8, 1989

vending machine operators, appellee argues that he would be unable to regain this business and would be irreparably harmed because he would be unable to seek compensation for any monetary loss from the City since the City is immune … In the present matter, Section 701.15 of the City Code clearly provides for a hearing for an aggrieved party upon request.

Lowing v. Public School Employes' Retirement Board

776 A.2d 306 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Jun 11, 2001

As a result, the instructions do not qualify as an interpretation of the underlying statute that must be upheld. … 45 P.S. § 1102(13), provides: “Statement of Policy” means any document, except an adjudication or a regulation, promulgated by an agency which sets forth substantive or procedural personal or property rights, privileges, immunities

Sukthankar's Radnor Township Zoning Appeals

2 Pa. Commw. 489 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Jul 29, 1971

Obviously as to side yard, and possibly as to rear yard, it did not unless by reason of its existence prior to any zoning regulation it enjoyed an immunity from zoning strictures. … The Ordinance thus clearly provides for the continuance not only of nonconforming uses but also of nonconforming conditions of buildings.

Schoenenberger v. Hayman

77 Pa. Commw. 411 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 7, 1983

We clearly must reject this contention by the Township as it is well established that an employer is liable for the torts of his employees committed in the course of their employment. See Shuman Estate v. Weber, 276 Pa. … Governmental immunity is inapplicable to the present case since the plaintiffs’ cause of action accrued, in 1977, after our Supreme Court’s decision in Ayala v.

Ketterer v. Commonwealth

133 Pa. Commw. 92 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · May 10, 1990

. — A dangerous condition of highways under the jurisdiction of a Commonwealth agency created by potholes or sinkholes or other similar conditions created by natural elements, except that the claimant to recover must establish … A statute is cloaked with a strong presumption of constitutionality and one who attacks it bears the burden of demonstrating that the legislation “clearly, palpably and plainly violates the constitution.” Hayes v.

Pennock v. Lenzi

882 A.2d 1057 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Sep 15, 2005

Pastierik is clearly the law of Pennsylvania, announced in an unequivocal holding of our Supreme Court. Even if we believed it were wrongly decided — which we do not— we would be bound to follow it, as was common pleas. … We also must reject plaintiffs’ argument that Pastierik violates the privileges and immunities clause of the United States Constitution.

B.L. Herold v. Univ. of Pittsburgh - of Com. System of Higher Ed. & 3M Co.

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Feb 16, 2023

“[I]t is well established that resort to the rules of statutory construction is to be made only when there is an ambiguity in the provision.” Oliver v. … Clearly, the Court has rejected any construction that grants full immunity to employers, leaving injured employees without an opportunity for reasonable compensation for their injuries. Id. at 864.

H. Babb v. L. Plusa, RN BSN

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Jan 6, 2016

Cumberland County Board of Assessment Appeals to support her proposition that the Snead factors must be applied to PVCS to determine whether it qualifies for immunity under the Tort Claims Act. 81 A.3d 24 (Pa. 2013). … In any event, through these statements, Plaintiff apparently attempts to argue that some charter schools do not qualify for immunity. However, that issue has already been decided in Warner ex rel. Warner v.

Zlakowski v. Commonwealth

154 Pa. Commw. 528 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Apr 2, 1993

Summary judgment is appropriate only if review of the record in a light most favorable to the non-moving party establishes that there is no genuine issue of material fact. Church of God of Prophecy v. … premises of Richard Wall Park in an unsafe and dangerous condition; b) failing to warn plaintiff’s decedent, Milton Jones, and others of the dangerous conditions existing therein; c) permitting children to play in a stream clearly