Case law

Korman Corp. v. Franklin Town Corp.

34 Pa. D. & C.3d 495 · Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County · Jun 20, 1984

In Beeber v. … Wilson v. Brown, 269 Pa. 225, 227 , 112 A. 1,2 (1920). See also Evans v. Diamond Alkali Co., 315 Pa. 335, 337 , 172 A.678, 679 (1934); Boyd v. Cooper, 269 Pa.

Hinkle v. Niblett

43 Pa. D. & C. 441 · Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County · Mar 28, 1940

(See, for example, amongst many cases, Fulwiler v. Mack-International Motor Truck Corp. et al., 137 Pa. Superior Ct. 421, 425 ). That is not so with the board in its relation to a referee. … See Weinstock v. United Cigar Stores Co. et al., 137 Pa. Superior Ct. 128 .

Taylor v. L.A. Fitness International LLC

16 Pa. D. & C.5th 491 · Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County · Aug 30, 2010

Brown v. Racquetball Centers Inc., 369 Pa. … For example, the court in Maloney v.

Felix v. Wax

13 Pa. D. & C.2d 600 · Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County · May 29, 1958

The defendant cites Snyder v. … A State board may, of course, upon advice of the Attorney General, elect to proceed against an unlicensed practitioner: Commonwealth v. McNatt, 84 D. & C. 479 (1952).

Walnut & Quince Streets Corp. v. Mills

14 Pa. D. & C. 327 · Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County · May 15, 1930

Repr. 675; Brown v. Stubbs, 128 Md. 129 , 97 Atl. Repr. 227; Rizzo v. Douglas, 201 N. Y. Supp. 194 ; Lane v. Whitaker, 275 Fed. Repr. 476. … That no right of appeal is provided for from the decision of the board is immaterial. In the case of Mutual Film Corp. v.

Durso v. Philadelphia Musical Society, Local No. 77

11 Pa. D. & C.2d 463 · Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County · Nov 20, 1957

See London v. Kingsley, 368 Pa. 109 (1951) ; Gaul v. Philadelphia, 384 Pa. 494 (1956). … See Raevsky v. Upholsterers’ International Union, 38 D. & C. 187 (1940). Thus in the case of Binkowski v.

Purnell v. Wolffe

34 Pa. D. & C.2d 286 · Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County · Aug 3, 1964

Superior Ct. 462 (1936); Walker v. Aluminum Company of America, 185 Pa. Superior Ct. 355 (1958); or if the board erred in applying the law to the facts: Lee v. McMinn Industries, Inc., 167 Pa. Superior Ct. 501 (1950). … The board is the final fact-finding body and we cannot set their findings aside unless there was a capricious disregard of competent evidence: Cohen v. Doubleday & Co., supra; *293 Gouldner v.

Sokoloski v. American Home Products

59 Pa. D. & C.4th 225 · Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County · Jan 9, 2003

In re Diet Drugs, Brown v. AHP at *19. The foregoing takes on significance because of what was required to establish and certify this class. In In re Diet Drugs, Brown v. … Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, State Examining Board, 490 Pa. 277, 281 , 416 A.2d 468, 470 (1980).

Robinson v. Madden Law Firm, P.C.

19 Pa. D. & C.5th 477 · Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County · Dec 1, 2010

Geiman v. Board of Assessment and Revision of Taxes, 412 Pa. 608, 614 , 195 A.2d 352, 355-56 (Pa. 1963). … Brown v. Delaware Valley Transplant Program, 371 Pa. Super. 583, 587 , 538 A.2d 889, 891 (Pa. Super. 1988).

McCaw v. Algase

1 Pa. D. & C.2d 588 · Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County · May 28, 1954

See, for instance, Nickolay v. Hudson Coal Company, 164 Pa. … Also Roschak et ux. v. Vulcan Iron Works, 157 Pa.

Brodsky v. McShain

71 Pa. D. & C. 595 · Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County · Apr 14, 1948

reverse such an order only if there has been an abuse of discretion by the board: Valicenti’s Appeal, 298 Pa. 276 ; Perelman et al. v. … See also Ventresca v. Exley et al., 358 Pa. 98 , in which Mr.

Corrado v. Mattioli

21 Pa. D. & C.2d 775 · Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County · Jan 6, 1960

Savolaine v. Matthew Leivo & Sons, supra, and McClemens v. Penn Auto Parts, supra. … Superior Ct. 177, 182 ; Wildman v. Pennsylvania Department of Highways, 157 Pa. Superior *782 Ct. 301, 303 ; Criner v. McKee Glass Company, 162 Pa. Superior Ct. 627, 629 ; Stachowski v.

Crimi v. Supreme Clothes, Inc.

26 Pa. D. & C.2d 578 · Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County · Aug 30, 1961

Claimant’s having been thus misled by the board will operate as an estoppel against defendant’s asserting the bar of the period of limitation under section 434: Wise v. … : Heurbin v.

Saslaff v. Equitable Life Assurance Society

11 Pa. D. & C.3d 398 · Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County · Jun 12, 1979

In Moskowitz v. … of Medical Education and Licensure and the Board, which rules and regulations shall be implemented by the Board.”

Appeal of Anthony M. Forsthoffer Post No. 389

12 Pa. D. & C. 211 · Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County · Apr 15, 1929

(Moore v. Taylor, 147 Pa. 481 .) Instead of taxing said premises for 1928, as should have been done, the Board of Revision of Taxes exempted them. … (Philadelphia v. Pennsylvania Co., 214 Pa. 138 , and Tobin v. Morgan, 70 Pa. 229 .) The facts before us are different from those involved in the cases we have cited.

Commonwealth ex rel. Forsythe v. Banmiller

25 Pa. D. & C.2d 744 · Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County · May 22, 1961

period of his parole, he must serve the remainder of the maximum sentence which had not been served when the parole was granted, without allowance of credit for the time defendant was on parole and not delinquent: Narcise v. … Board of Trustees, Eastern State Penitentiary, 137 Pa. Superior Ct. 394 , and Commonwealth ex rel. Tiscio v. Martin, 180 Pa. Superior Ct. 462 . Relator’s petition is, therefore, without merit and it is now discharged.

Erace v. Dreger

12 Pa. D. & C.3d 390 · Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County · Apr 23, 1979

Section 323 has been expressly adopted as the law in Pennsylvania: Dejesus v. Liberty Mutual Ins. Co., 423 Pa. 198 , 223 A. 2d 849 (1966); Brown v. Travelers Ins. Co., 434 Pa. 507 , 254 A. 2d 27 (1969); Hamil v. … Philadelphia Board of Education, supra, also removed a municipality’s absolute freedom from liability despite the exercise of a discretionary duty. In Breiner v. C & P Home Builders, Inc., 398 F. Supp. 250 (E.D.

Snyder v. Oestreich

9 Pa. D. & C.2d 92 · Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County · Dec 13, 1956

In Neill v. … In Neill v.

Glassman v. Philadelphia

9 Pa. D. & C.2d 495 · Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County · Oct 30, 1956

.” *503 Even if we were to consider ourselves bound by the decisions in Frame v. Felix, supra, and Taylor v. … In the case of Nippon Ki-Ito Kaisha, Ltd., v.

Boyd v. Smith

128 Pa. 205 · Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County · Oct 7, 1889

In order to create a fund sufficient to pay the dividends agreed upon, it was at first proposed that Gamón should collect and pay to the board of education his claim against the Scots’ Presbyterian Church, and that the board … In the case of Wallace v. Wainwright, 87 .Pa. 263, “ Wallace & Krebs had no beneficial interest whatever in the claims assigned to them.