Case law

Burrell v. City of Philadelphia

47 Pa. D. & C.2d 647 · Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County · Aug 19, 1969

Superior Ct. 72 ; Young v. Board of Adjustment of Wilkinsburg Borough, 349 Pa. 450 ; T. Mendelson Co., Inc. v. Pennsylvania Railroad Company, 332 Pa. 470 , 2 A. 2d 820 . … In such cases, equity has jurisdiction and will afford relief: Duquesne Light Co. v. Upper St. Clair Township, 377 Pa. 323 ; Collegeville Borough v. Philadelphia Suburban Water Company, 377 Pa. 636 ; Wood v.

Rossiter v. Becker

17 Pa. D. & C. 225 · Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County · Oct 24, 1932

In Vorbnoff v. … It was stated in Riley v.

In re "Spain in Flames"

36 Pa. D. & C. 285 · Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County · Nov 24, 1937

Justice Roberts said only a few months ago, in Herndon v. … In view of these words and of decisions such as Near v.

Friedman v. Exley

57 Pa. D. & C. 586 · Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County · Mar 29, 1946

It is equally true however that the Board’s powers are limited. … Such variations are confined to cases of particular necessity and for reasons that are substantial, serious and compelling: Huebner et ux. v. Philadelphia Saving Fund Society et al., 127 Pa.

City of Philadelphia v. Int'l Ass'n of Firefighters, Local 22

29 Pa. D. & C.5th 35 · Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County · Mar 1, 2013

Highway Paving Co. v. State Board of Arbitration of Claims, 180 A.2d 896, 897 (Pa. 1962). However, there is a narrow exception for review under the Pennsylvania Intergovernmental Cooperation Authority (PICA) Act. … Borough of Pottstown v. Pennsylvania Municipal Retirement Board, 712 A.2d 741, 744 (Pa. 1998).

Gordon v. NCR Corp.

13 Pa. D. & C.3d 636 · Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County · Feb 27, 1980

The band didn’t broke (sic), the board broke. “Q. They did not break? “A. The board underneath the roll of paper broke.” … He testified that either the floor boards fractured or the pallet boards collapsed.

Sano v. Globe Rubber Products Corp.

14 Pa. D. & C.2d 211 · Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County · Jan 23, 1958

In Diehl v. General Baking Co., 154 Pa. … In McCoy v. Spriggs, 102 Pa.

Harrison v. Drossner

20 Pa. D. & C. 329 · Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County · Jan 2, 1934

The compensation board failed to apply the law to the facts as disclosed by the uncontradicted testimony that, whereas at the start of his employment the deceased was receiving a guaranty of $25 per week, that arrangement … The ruling in Dugas v. American Zinc & Chemical Co. et al., 28 Dist. R. 34, is not at variance with our views.

Gavin v. Philadelphia

24 Pa. D. & C.2d 261 · Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County · Oct 25, 1960

As was stated in Leff v. N. … In the case of Brown and McCloskey, they were requested ostensibly because of their experience in the detective division, although for some two months after his appointment, Captain Brown was assigned to the sixth police

Philadelphia Board of Education Petition

10 Pa. D. & C.3d 457 · Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County · Nov 10, 1977

Although this court does have some concern as to the manner in which the board adopted its budget and as to the long-term wisdom evinced by the board of education in the molding of its budget; and we also have concern as … Johnson v. Pennsylvania Housing Finance Agency, 453 Pa. 329 , 309 A. 2d 528 (1973); Hetherington v. McHale, 10 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 501 , 311 A. 2d 162 (1973). . Commonwealth ex rel. Kelley v.

Commonwealth ex rel. Woodson v. Myers

25 Pa. D. & C.2d 373 · Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County · Aug 31, 1961

Lockhart v. Myers, 193 Pa. … The Commonwealth’s evi *376 dence established that relator, together with another defendant, William Brown, was apprehended while in the very act of assaulting their victim.

Philadelphia School District v. Nardizzi

14 Pa. D. & C. 517 · Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County · Dec 3, 1930

In White v. Turner, 217 Pa. 25 , the contractors for a school building gave to a subcontractor an order on the school board which was accepted. … This distinction is thus stated by Judge Rice in Earner v.

Anderson v. School District of Philadelphia

66 Pa. D. & C.2d 441 · Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County · Jan 10, 1974

We deem the follow *455 ing language from Smith V. … v.

Vaughn v. McFadden

35 Pa. D. & C. 307 · Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County · Mar 23, 1939

J., The action of the Workmen’s Compensation Board in setting aside the referee’s award of compensation, from which this appeal is taken, presents only one question for our consideration. … See Carville v. A. F. Bornot & Co., 288 Pa. 104 (1927), and 71 C. J. 243.

Heinrich v. Charles W. Young & Co.

43 Pa. D. & C. 269 · Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County · Feb 3, 1942

In Monahan v. Seeds & Durham et al., 336 Pa. 67 , it was held that testimony which is conflicting or of such a nature as to render any inference drawn from it a mere guess or conjecture is insufficient. … Stahl v. Watson Coal Co., 268 Pa. 452 . We are not unmindful of The Pennsylvania Occupational Disease Act of June 21, 1939, P.

Burchewsky v. Max Bailis & Sons

36 Pa. D. & C. 378 · Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County · Aug 9, 1939

Compensation payments “are intended as a substitute for wages”: Zimmer v. Closky et al., 122 Pa. … To use an expression of the court in Pikutas v. Glen Alden Coal Co., 129 Pa.

Hauss v. Power

5 Pa. D. & C.2d 180 · Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County · Nov 4, 1955

The board has decided that it should not permit a commercial venture in a neighborhood devoted solely to residential purposes. … Zoning Case, 379 Pa. 516 (1954); Reininger Zoning Case, 362 Pa. 116 (1949); Triolo v. Exley, 358 Pa. 555 (1948).

Melody v. Bornot, Inc.

18 Pa. D. & C. 16 · Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County · Apr 13, 1933

On October 3, 1930, the board refused the petition for a hearing de novo. … claimant is to be deprived of an opportunity of establishing a right to compensation, and, if necessary, we would set aside and disregard every statute of limitation that appears in The Workmen’s Compensation Act (Horn v.

International Organization Master, Mates & Pilots of America v. International Organization

11 Pa. D. & C.2d 86 · Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County · Jan 10, 1956

See Rueb v. Rehder, 24 N. M. 534, 174 Pac. 992 (1918). … The facts here cannot be compared with a situation Where the board had earlier voted for acquittal (Cf. Rueb v. Rehder, supra), or where no notice of the second hearing was given: Cf. Commonwealth v.

Manayunk Trust Company's Appeal

42 Pa. D. & C. 541 · Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County · Jul 25, 1941

advertised by the board made it necessary for the board to refuse the application. … L. 507: Cumberland County v. Lemoyne Trust Co., 318 Pa. 85 . Appellant contends that that case is distinguishable from the present case. The differences, however, are not operative factors for tax purposes.