Case law

Commonwealth v. Barnett

7 Pa. D. & C.4th 539 · Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County · May 1, 1989

Only defendant Brown specifically raised this precise claim in the post-verdict motions. … Commonwealth v. Staten, 350 Pa. Super. 173 , 504 A.2d 301 (1986), rev’d on other grounds, 514 Pa. 377 , 524 A.2d 896 (1987); Commonwealth v. Mathis, 317 Pa. Super. 362 , 464 A.2d 362 (1983). See also, King v.

Hand in Hand Building & Loan Ass'n v. Deery

24 Pa. D. & C. 635 · Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County · Oct 1, 1935

In Brown v. … In Fleming v.

E. M. W. Bar Corp. v. Hilliard

20 Pa. D. & C.2d 435 · Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County · Oct 1, 1959

No appeal was filed from the determination of said board. … See Grimaldi v. Local No. 9, 397 Pa. 1 .

Anderson v. McIlhenny

9 Pa. D. & C. 603 · Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County · Aug 2, 1927

Justice Brown in Mix v. North American Co., 209 Pa. 636 : “It has been said that the greatest object of civil government is to get twelve honest men in the jury-box.

Bank of Italy v. West Indies Importing Co.

2 Pa. D. & C. 778 · Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County · Apr 3, 1923

Ferguson, J., This is an action of assumpsit against the defendant corporation upon a draft made by Bartolomeo Pio on Brown Brothers & Company to the order of Henderson-Longton Company, and endorsed by them to the plaintiff … The only recent case to which our attention has been called is Birmingham Iron Foundry v. Regnery, 33 Pa. Superior Ct. 54 .

Rader v. Rubenstein

43 Pa. D. & C. 43 · Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County · Nov 25, 1941

In the case of Lummis v. The Big Sandy Land & Manufacturing Co. et al., 188 Pa. 27 (1898), cited in O’Brien, etc., v. … The *45 Act of 1863 therefore applies: Maule v. Boyd, 18 Phila. 326 (undated); Brunswick Co. v. Brown et al., 22 W. N. C. 43 (1887); Biesty v. Loury et al., 25 Dist. R. 639 (1916).

Real Estate Trust Co.'s Appeal

21 Pa. D. & C. 438 · Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County · Sep 20, 1934

Almost every city has its own method of determining this, and as long as the method is reasonable it is entirely within the discretion of the assessors: Pardee et al. v. … Co. v. Ranck, 78 Pa. 454 ; Houston v. Western Washington R. R. Co., 204 Pa. 321 ; 22 C. J., 180, sec. 125e.

Commonwealth v. Thompson

2 Pa. D. & C.4th 632 · Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County · Apr 3, 1989

See Commonwealth v. Brown, supra, citing Commonwealth v. Stephens, supra. … Burns, 287 N.C. 102 , 214 S.E.2d 56 , cert. denied, 423 U.S. 933 , 96 S.Ct. 288 , 46 L.Ed. 264 (1975); Harvey v. State, 53 Ark. 425 , 14 S.W. 645 (1890); Brown v.

Middleberg v. Hyman Korman Corp.

70 Pa. D. & C.2d 635 · Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County · Dec 12, 1974

Any party may appeal from the action of the Board of Arbitrators to the Common Pleas Court of Philadelphia County. … Philadelphia Common Pleas Judge Hirsh in the case of Leinwand v.

Shure v. Goodinate Co.

14 Pa. D. & C. 209 · Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County · Oct 24, 1930

Co. v. Rhodes, 180 Pa. 157 . When he shows his warrant, the only matter for inquiry is whether or not that warrant is sufficient to justify his act. … In Cooper v. Shaver, 101 Pa. 547 , a warrant very similar to the one before us was considered, and it was held that a judgment entered on such a warrant could not be attacked for irregularity.

Mount v. Bradford

2 Miles 17 · Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County · Nov 12, 1836

Brown, 3 Binn. 203 ; and though Millar v. Hall, 1 Dali. 228, was there cited as furnishing the date of the doctrine, yet it is difficult to find in the report of that case any foundation for the reference. In Boggs v. … Treacle, 5 Binn. 339 , the rule was repeated upon the authority of Smith v. Brown. In Walsh v.

McAnany v. City of Philadelphia Police Pension Fund Ass'n

1 Pa. D. & C.2d 556 · Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County · Oct 15, 1954

The board then adopted the proposed amendment for submission to the members and their vote. … Justice Horace Stern (now Chief Justice) in Diskin v.

Kendrick v. Quaker City Coat & Apron Supply & Laundry Co.

8 Pa. D. & C. 439 · Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County · Jul 13, 1926

Uhler, 75 Pa. 467 ; Laughman’s Appeal, 128 Pa. 1 ; Spruks v. Connell, 7 Lacka. Leg. News, 198 ; Canal Co. v. Clark, 13 Wallace, 311; Columbia Mill Co. v. Alcorn, 150 U. S. 460 ; Elgin Watch Co. v. … In Suburban Press v.

Staley v. Salvesen

35 Pa. D. & C.2d 318 · Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County · Mar 7, 1963

Pursuant to section 7 (c) of the act, the Federal Reserve Board promulgated Regulation T. … Law Rep., para. 90,849; Klein v. D. R. Comenzo Co., 207 N. Y. S. 2d 739 (1960); Accord, Bankers Life & Casualty Co. v. Bellanca Corp., 288 F. 2d 784 (7th Cir., 1961).

Girard Trust Co. v. Beckman Bros.

18 Pa. D. & C. 659 · Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County · Jun 7, 1933

Lemmon *661 et al., 111 Pa. 56 ; Gribbel v. Brown, 202 Pa. 10 . It was bound to account to the real owner for the rents which it collected: Myers’ Appeal, 42 Pa. 518 ; Mellon et al v. Lemmon et al., supra: Gribbel v. … Brown, supra; Randal v. Jersey Mortgage Investment Co. et al., 306 Pa. 1 . The plaintiff unquestionably had the right to pay the taxes in order to protect its possession of the mortgaged premises.

City of Philadelphia v. Reading Transit Co.

15 Pa. D. & C. 643 · Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County · May 28, 1931

Brown, Jr., J., Plaintiff has brought suit in assumpsit to recover for paving, repaving and repairs made by it upon certain of its streets used by defendant in the operation of an electric street railway, consisting of nine … Co., 177 Pa. 371, 377, 378 , and Williamsport v. Williamsport Passenger Ry. Co., 206 Pa. 65, 70 , wherein Mr. Justice Brown distinguished also <he case of Reading v. United Traction Co., supra.

Cohen v. Kutner Buick, Inc.

27 Pa. D. & C.3d 421 · Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County · Jul 13, 1981

v. … North American Rockwell and Ingersoll-Rand v. Workmen’s Compensation Board, (supra.)

Austin v. City Stores Co.

89 Pa. D. & C. 57 · Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County · Nov 28, 1953

Installment accounts also blossomed. *66 The testimony of the chairman of the board of Lit Brothers was to the effect that the dividend was very liberal when all of the factors that a board must take into account in setting … Despite high praise for management, which of course includes the board, the action of the board as to dividends is attacked.

Atkinson v. McClain

35 Pa. D. & C. 49 · Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County · Mar 9, 1939

This act was considered by Court of Common Pleas No. 4 of Philadelphia County, in the case of Gannon et al. v. … . & C. 499, 503, in an opinion rendered October 4,1938, in which Judge Francis Shunk Brown, Jr., in discussing a related question which was involved in that case, refers to the pertinent clauses of the act as follows: *52

Kellerman v. City of Philadelphia

34 Pa. D. & C. 264 · Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County · Oct 26, 1938

In the recent case of Holgate Brothers Co. et al. v. Bashore et al., 331 Pa. 255 , our Supreme Court had before it the 44-hour week law of July 2, 1937, P. … There is no policy set up, there are no standards, there are no boundaries within which the Department and the Board must exercise their discretion.