Case law

Lore v. Sobolevitch

675 A.2d 805 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · May 3, 1996

Whether the doctrine of sovereign immunity is an absolute bar to the underlying lawsuit, insofar as it is a claim for damages. (R.R. at 61.) … Judge Guarino clearly falls within Rule 102’s definition of “personnel of the system;” Lore, on the other hand, clearly does not.

Levine v. Commonwealth

79 Pa. Commw. 357 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Jan 5, 1984

Clearly, then, Dr. Levine had no property entitlement to a due process hearing before DOE. See also Board of Regents v. … Levine has established no procedural due process right to a promotion, he cannot claim an independent liberty interest in being free from action which he may view as arbitrary. Cf. Kanter v.

Finnegan v. SCHOOL EMP. RETIREMENT BD.

126 Pa. Commw. 584 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 27, 1990

She received a flyer detailing an early retirement window for which she believed she qualified. … Regrettably, Pennsylvania Association of State Mental Hospital Physicians clearly requires this court to hold, as a. matter of law, that the board cannot be estopped from asserting a statutory provision.

Davis v. Commonwealth, Unemployment Compensation Board of Review

57 Pa. Commw. 499 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 13, 1981

The Unemployment Compensation Board of Review (Board) added findings that Davis was not coerced, threatened or promised “immunity from prosecution” or “reinstatement of his job” if he signed the statement and note. … Finally, Davis contends that he did not receive a fault overpayment because there is no evidence in the record to establish impropriety on his part. In Beres v. Unemployment Compensation Board of Review, 38 Pa.

Brown v. Community College of Philadelphia

654 A.2d 32 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Dec 29, 1994

. § 762(a)(7) dealing with governmental immunity waiver, which is clearly not involved in this case. … In fact, the Community College Act defines community college as a college established and operated by “a local sponsor.” 24 P.S. § 19-1901-A(4).

Commonwealth v. Philadelphia Gas Works

25 Pa. Commw. 66 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Jun 3, 1976

Chapter 9 of that Article establishes departmental boards and commissions. … Southwestern Delaware Cownty Municipal Authority, supra, held that property owned by a municipality and devoted exclusively to public purposes is immune from any form of taxation or assessments unless a statute clearly and

Sever v. Commonwealth

100 Pa. Commw. 217 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Sep 2, 1986

To establish procedures for implementing Executive Order 1980-18, Murray G. Dickman, Secretary of Administration, issued Management Directive 515.18. … against Charles Sciotto in his official capacity is barred by the doctrines of sovereign and official immunity.

Zemprelli v. Thornburgh

55 Pa. Commw. 330 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Dec 16, 1980

Those undeniable prospects, as petitioner’s brief points out, simply confirm that the important issue in this case is one clearly capable of replication. … Huson, *348 404 U.S. 97 (1971), are clearly fulfilled by the circumstances here: (1) this case involves an issue of first impression, the resolution of which has not been clearly foreshadowed; (2) retrospective application

Richard Allen Prep. Charter School v. PA, Department of Education and Pedro A. Rivera, in his official capacity as Secretary of Education

161 A.3d 415 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · May 1, 2017

However, Chester II is clearly distinguishable from the current case and is limited to its particular facts. … The purpose of mandamus is to enforce rights that have been clearly established. Tindell v. Dep’t of Corr., 87 A.3d 1029, 1034 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2014) (citation omitted; emphasis added).

Mars Area School District v. United Presbyterian Women's Ass'n of North America

693 A.2d 1002 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Apr 30, 1997

In 1891, UPWA’s charitable purpose extended to establish and maintain a hospital for the treatment of sick and disabled women and children and to establish a home for the aged. 1 In 1929, UPWA acquired farmland in Butler … Moreover, the evidence and the trial court’s findings establish that UPWA qualified under both statutes. Thus the fact that the trial court based its analysis on Section 204 rather than Section 202 was harmless error.

City of Philadelphia v. F.A. Realty Investors Corp.

95 A.3d 377 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Jun 27, 2014

This interpretation reflects the Legislature’s intent to establish an end date for a property owner’s right to redemption. … In Dooling Tire Company, this Court briefly addressed the issue of redemption of vacant property under clearly distinguishable facts.

JOINT BARGAINING COM. v. Com. of Pa.

109 Pa. Commw. 11 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Aug 27, 1987

The pertinent provision of this agreement reads as follows: It is the intent of the parties that an unfunded reserve account shall be established by the Employer. … simply seek to restrain state officials from performing affirmative acts are not within the rule of immunity.

Swift v. Radnor Township

983 A.2d 227 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 14, 2009

Our court determined that Appellants failed to establish a private nuisance. … Trial court opinion, at 4. 3 Appellants 2005 Action clearly sought equitable and declaratory relief based upon a nuisance.

Ratner v. Day by Day Enterprises, Inc.

110 Pa. Commw. 253 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 14, 1987

American Dredging Company, 406 Pa. 145 , 177 A.2d 451 (1962), our State Supreme Court clearly held that joinder of a party who is secondarily liable is not authorized under Rule 2252. See also Eckrich v. … S. §8542(b)(7) (pertaining to governmental immunity for dangerous conditions of sidewalks), as permitting the City to be secondarily liable only as to property owners.

Inkpen v. Roberts

862 A.2d 700 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Dec 1, 2004

The party seeking access bears the burden of establishing that the requested material bears the characteristics of a public record. Id. … Clearly, the acts dis *706 cussed above relate to.fees to be charged by county officers in general and recorders of deeds in particular.

Commonwealth v. Eiseman

85 A.3d 1117 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Feb 19, 2014

immunity is applicable.... … [I]t would be anomalous for our legislature to grant immunity in one statute and simultaneously abrogate that immunity in another statute.”).

Thomas v. THE CITY OF PHILADELPHIA

804 A.2d 97 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Jun 28, 2002

Sergeant Schwarzl filed a timely cross-appeal on April 18, 2001 on the trial court's denial of qualified immunity, which was included in the summary judgment motions of Officer Bigle and Sergeant Schwarzl. … Forsyth, 472 U.S. 511 , 105 S.Ct. 2806 , 86 L.Ed.2d 411 (1985), which provides that an order denying qualified immunity is an appealable collateral order in federal court.

Pennsylvania State Police v. Grove

119 A.3d 1102 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Jul 7, 2015

The Rozier Affidavit establishes that there are two PSP video recordings responsive to Requester’s RTKL request. (Rozier Affidavit ¶ 9.) … Because the troopers clearly had reason to believe that they were being recorded by their MVR equipment, audio recordings capturing their communications *1111 are not protected from disclosure by the Wiretap Act.

Bell v. Township of Spring Brook

30 A.3d 554 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Sep 28, 2011

By order dated November 5, 2008, the trial court granted the Township’s motion, concluding that the Township was immune from suit, that Bell’s complaint equated to an untimely land use appeal, that the use of the property … A demurrer can only be sustained where the complaint clearly is insufficient to establish the pleader's right to relief. Id.

In re Appeals of Marple Newtown School District

46 Pa. Commw. 80 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Sep 18, 1979

The Dunwoody Home (Home) was established in 1924 as a Pennsylvania non-profit corporation, devoted to the care of the elderly. … It is true, of course, that the size of the admission fees here concerned clearly indicates that the cottage program is designed for persons of financial means who have no immediate need of charity.