Case law

Weiner v. Fisher

67 Pa. D. & C.4th 1 · Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County · Jun 11, 2004

, be board certified by the same or a similar approved board, except as provided in subsection (e). … In Lyles v.

First Union National Bank v. Quality Carriers Inc.

48 Pa. D. & C.4th 1 · Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County · Oct 10, 2000

Berks County Board of Assessment Appeals, 709 A.2d 928, 936 (Pa. Commw. 1998). … Inc. v. Grove, 803 F. Supp. 1019, 1022 (M.D. Pa. 1992) (refusing to allow shareholders to bring an action against board members directly).

Louise H. Haessler Memorial Fund's Appeal

41 Pa. D. & C. 202 · Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County · May 2, 1941

. *203 Philadelphia’s Board of Revision of Taxes has assessed the Fund’s securities for personal property taxes for the year 1939. Dissatisfied, the Fund appealed. … Board cf Home Missions, etc., v. Philadelphia, 266 Pa. 405, 409 (1920). We conclude the Fund to be such a public charity as to be exempt from the personal property tax.

Philadelphia v. Ridge Ave. Ry. Co.

142 Pa. 484 · Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County · May 25, 1891

In support of this doctrine they cite Beloit v. Morgan, 7 Wall. 619 ; Aurora City v. West, 7 Wall. 85 ; Durant v. Essex Co., 7 Wall. 107 ; Corcoran v. Canal Co., 94 U. S. 741 ; Wilson v. Deen, 121 U. … See, also, Washington Packet Co. v. Sickles, 24 How. 342 ; Davis v. Brown, 94 U. S. 423 . The doctrine, as we have stated it, is consistent with our own cases: Long v. Long, 5 W. 102 ; Kilheffer v.

Sherry v. Cedarbrook Country Club

26 Pa. D. & C.2d 1 · Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County · Nov 17, 1960

This was indicated in Kensington National Bank v. Cedarbrook Country Club, 161 Pa. Superior Ct. 407 (1947). … Collmer, (iv) Jere Goff redo and (v) George E. Peterson. There were exceptions filed also by respondent Gartling, but he withdrew them.

Terrizzi Beverage Co. v. Local Union No. 830 Brewery & Beer Distributor Drivers, Helpers & Platform Men

27 Pa. D. & C.2d 507 · Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County · May 8, 1962

In San Diego Building Trades Council v. Garmon, 359 U.S. 236 (1959), the Supreme Court of the United States held that the National Labor Relations Board has exclusive jurisdiction where there is a labor dispute. … We recognize that the opinion in United Construction Workers v.

Pensurdata, Inc. v. Fast & Accurate Data Recording

75 Pa. D. & C.2d 364 · Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County · Apr 4, 1975

In three cases, Emmaus Municipal Authority v. Eltz, 416 Pa. 123 , 204 A. 2d 926 (1964), Westmoreland Hospital Association v. Westmoreland Construction Company, 423 Pa. 255 , 223 A. 2d 681 (1966), and Bange v. … In Westmoreland Hospital Association v.

Epstein v. Rabinowitz

83 Pa. D. & C. 197 · Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County · Aug 8, 1952

In the case of Philadelphia v. Holmes Elec. … Chief Justice Maxey in Kurman et al v.

Kneass v. City of Philadelphia

1 Pa. D. & C. 371 · Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County · Apr 18, 1922

Thus, the so-called City Treasurer is in fact the treasurer of the county (Com. v. Oellers, 140 Pa. 457 ), but was, nevertheless, made by Act of June 1, 1885, P. … L. 37, 44, head of a city department, and the Board of Public Education is required to elect him treasurer of the school district. The City Controller, although a county officer (see Taggart v.

Twer v. School District of Philadelphia

7 Pa. D. & C.3d 689 · Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County · Jun 7, 1978

Co. v. S.G.S. Co., 456 Pa. 94 , 318 A. 2d 906 (1974). … The school board, the superintendent and legal counsel have all erroneously purported to confer on plaintiff the status of professional employe.

Clairol, Inc. v. Martin Wholesale Distributors, Inc.

35 Pa. D. & C.2d 78 · Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County · Apr 3, 1964

Semler, Inc. v. Kirk, 27 F. Supp. 630 (1938); Coca-Cola v. Brown, 60 F. 2d 319 (1932). … Semler, Inc. v. Kirk, supra; Coca-Cola Co. v. Brown, 60 F. 2d 319 (M.D. Pa. 1932); Waring v. WDAS Broadcasting Station, Inc., 327 Pa. 433 (1937).

Construction of Vine Street Extension

18 Pa. D. & C.2d 115 · Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County · Jan 19, 1959

J., This matter arises out of cross appeals from, an award of the board of view fixing the value of. property, hereinafter identified as Richter’s, condemned by the Com *116 monwealth for the. purpose of extending Vine Street … The standard applied in Klein v. Commonwealth, 9 D. & C. 2d 792, on this issue has apparently persuaded the Commonwealth that the limitation is inapplicable.

Garrett v. George K. Garrett Co.

39 Pa. D. & C. 179 · Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County · Feb 6, 1940

The power of courts of equity to appoint receivers in proper cases, even for solvent corporations, is well recognized: Cunliffe et al. v. Consumers Association of America et al., 280 Pa. 263 ; Schmitz et al. v. … This power, however, should be exercised with the utmost caution, and only as a last resort: Hlawati v. Maeder-Hlawati Co. et al., 289 Pa. 233 ; Bowman v. Gum, Inc., et al., 321 Pa. 516 . See also McDougall et al. v.

Slifer v. Greenmount Cemetery Co.

66 Pa. D. & C. 76 · Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County · Aug 17, 1948

Defendant company is managed by a board of directors, with a superintendent and employes under their control, said board of directors having power to make appropriate rules and regulations from time to time for the government … In the subsequent case of Benson v.

Epstein v. Commonwealth

72 Pa. D. & C.2d 235 · Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County · Jan 29, 1976

The *237 board of view considered the four tracts as separate parcels in assessing damages. … See Morris v. Commonwealth, 367 Pa. 410 , 80 A.2d 762 (1951).

Reibel's Estate

23 Pa. D. & C. 307 · Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County · May 29, 1935

Even in the cases of executors and trustees, if common prudence and good faith are exercised, they will not be surcharged for retention of such securities: Brown’s Estate, 287 Pa. 499 . … Apart from the fact that the accountant placed himself under the direction of counsel, which according to Vez. v.

Church Foundation v. City of Philadelphia

3 Pa. D. & C.2d 571 · Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County · Feb 1, 1955

Flood, J., This is an appeal from the board’s denial of petitioner’s application for exemption from city and school taxation of a certain landscaped plot, part of the ground upon which petitioner’s church and parish house … The board has exempted only a narrow strip sufficient for ingress and egress to the church which lies alongside of the church building and has held the balance not to be exempt.

Davis v. Souder

2 Foster 59 · Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County · Feb 7, 1874

No better illustration-of this can be found than in the leading case of Rerick v. … This proposition assumes that the plaintiff is a bona fide purchaser without notice; whereas, the fact is undisputed in this case, that he is a stockholder in the said company, was one of the board of directors at the time

Busillo v. Silvers

10 Pa. D. & C.2d 344 · Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County · Apr 30, 1956

Brown, P. … Thus, in Kelly v.

Sirianni v. Nugent Bros.

5 Pa. D. & C.3d 734 · Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County · May 5, 1978

Defendant’s reliance on Wiley v. Woods is misplaced. In Wiley v. … Board of Assessment v. Montgomery, 14 Pa.