Case law

Safe Auto Insurance Co. v. Berlin

991 A.2d 327 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 5, 2010

Moreover, it does not qualify as one of those covered under the policy’s definition of “[y]ou, your, yourself.” … To the extent that the Hose Company relies on Lima Fire Company to establish a basis for coverage, we find the case inapplicable.

Rettger v. UPMC SHADYSIDE

991 A.2d 915 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 17, 2010

Bonaroti clearly demonstrated that they were adverse parties. … Rather, the term clearly extends to the profound emotional and psychological loss suffered upon the death of a parent or a child where the evidence establishes the negligence of another as its cause.

Commonwealth v. Selenski

2017 Pa. Super. 69 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 16, 2017

The Court’s “solely or primarily dependent” language did not establish a special new definition of relevance for this class of cases that forecloses admissibility in all other situations. … Dysart therefore was not clearly relevant under that formulation of the relevance standard that it derived from the Walker opinion.

Commonwealth v. Gorodetsky

178 Pa. Super. 467 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Jul 21, 1955

The evidence clearly and definitely establishes that defendant possessed and sold, delivered or trafficked in morphine in violation of section 4 of the Act of 1917, as amended, 35 PS §854, and that he did not come within … The evidence was clearly sufficient to. establish a.narcotic content of the tablets, and'that; each lot contained morphine in excess -of one-fourth , of a. grain in .one avoirdupois ounce. Cf. Com. v. Bozzi, 169 Pa.

Commonwealth v. Feldman

243 Pa. Super. 408 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Nov 22, 1976

Rather, the testimony of the complainant clearly established that the complainant demanded his money back, if appellant was not going to repair the car. … The Commonwealth did not attempt to establish that appellant was involved in the auto’s theft as a basis for establishing a conversion.

Telwell Inc. v. Grandbridge Real Estate Capital LLC

2016 Pa. Super. 159 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Jul 21, 2016

It further held that there was no exception from sovereign immunity that would permit recovery against PSERS, and dismissed the case in its entirety. … Our standard of review is that “the trial court's order will be reversed only where it is established that the court -7- J-A08010-16 committed an error of law or clearly abused its

U.S. Bank, N.A. Ex Rel. Bank of America, N.A. v. Pautenis

2015 Pa. Super. 129 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · May 29, 2015

“[T]he twofold purpose of post-trial motions: (1) to afford the trial court in the first instance, the opportunity to correct asserted trial errors[] and (2) to clearly and narrowly frame issues for appellate review,” … The Uniform Business Records as Evidence Act and Rule of Evidence 803(6) required CFS to establish the “circumstantial trustworthiness” of the documents and have a qualified witness testify in support

Carney v. Carney

449 Pa. Super. 179 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 20, 1996

While in military service, appellant sustained several injuries qualifying him for a 20 percent military disability benefit. … The Divorce Code clearly states that “it is the policy of the Commonwealth to ...

Com. v. Wiggs, S.

2026 Pa. Super. 126 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Jun 17, 2026

Nothing in the context of section 4571 or the MVC as a whole would “clearly” suggest that, with respect to that specific statute, “police officer” was intended to have a different meaning than the one provided in section … The absence of a public ownership requirement for a “police vehicle” establishes that its omission was intentional. See Mimi Investors, LLC v.

Cresci Construction Services, Inc. v. Martin

2013 Pa. Super. 66 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 28, 2013

Accordingly, unless the obligation which was determined to be owed to [the non-breaching party] can be said to qualify as a “liquidated sum,” no prejudgment interest may be awarded. … The verdict-winner must establish that the jury’s award represented direct damages. Id.

Berrington v. Berrington

409 Pa. Super. 355 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Sep 9, 1991

The Westinghouse pension plan is a qualified plan under the Retirement Equity Act of 1984. The executive plan, however, is not a qualified plan. … It does not imply intentional wrong or bad faith, or misconduct, nor any reflection on the judge but means the clearly erroneous conclusion and judgment— one that is clearly against logic and [the] effect of such facts as

Com. v. Shaw, P.

217 A.3d 265 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Aug 16, 2019

The record in the trial court established that [Appellant] held Ms. Peck down and tried to kiss her and then fled the scene. [Appellant] and Ms. … The PCRA court addressed Appellant’s claim as follows: The instant claim is clearly distinguishable from Cruz. In Cruz, the appellant presented evidence that he was “lobotomized.”

Commonwealth v. Allessie

267 Pa. Super. 334 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Jun 27, 1979

Clearly, he was arrested at a time when the police lacked probable cause to arrest. Steding v. Commonwealth, 480 Pa. 485 , 391 A.2d 989 (1978); Commonwealth v. Bosurgi, 411 Pa. 56 , 190 A.2d 304 (1968). … Therefore, the Commonwealth was required to establish that the slip of paper and the confession was the product of some cause other than the illegal detention.

In Re Estate of Dilbon

456 Pa. Super. 490 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 11, 1997

Dilbon’s estate establishes a financial interest in the estate, because the claim is unliquidated, it does not constitute a debt. … Therefore, assuming arguendo that a procedural default took place, the appellant clearly was not prejudiced by the allegedly improper actions of the Register of Wills.

Sabad v. Fessenden

2003 Pa. Super. 202 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · May 22, 2003

And I have stated clearly to him that that’s something that just had not crossed my mind. That all my energy related to our relationship at this point is dealing with trying to protect my assets as he and I had agreed. … Any consent by a spouse (or establishment that the consent of a spouse may not be obtained) under the preceding sentence shall be effective only with respect to such spouse. * * # % # 29 U.S.C.A. § 1055 (a), (c).

Bannar v. Miller

701 A.2d 242 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Aug 27, 1997

Such a rule would permit the lawyer to be immune to sanctions for impermissible use of process by hiding behind the layman who paid for the lawyer’s advice. … However, such instruction is clearly relevant to the determination of gross negligence, the existence or nonexistence of probable cause, and improper purpose.

Ritter's Estate

53 Pa. Super. 337 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Apr 21, 1913

Let us first look at the naked devise, stripped of any qualifying words, to determine what its nature and extent would be in the absence of such qualifying words. … have been reiterated in a long line of cases, but nowhere perhaps are they stated more clearly and strongly *341 than by Mr.

Com. v. Rivera, W.

2020 Pa. Super. 208 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Aug 25, 2020

In light of the above, Appellant’s arguments do not establish that the felony-murder rule “clearly, palpably, and plainly violates constitutional rights.” Brensinger, 218 A.3d at 456. … In determining whether a single or multiple conspiracy has been established, we consider several relevant factors.

Commonwealth v. Romanoff

258 Pa. Super. 452 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 20, 1978

The witness was found qualified to testify. Appellant alleges error as to this finding of competency. Based on the foregoing, we stand in agreement with the *459 trial court. … The proof of rape failed to establish penetration, and it was clearly correct for judgment to have been arrested as to the verdict of guilty of rape.

In Re Barnes Foundation

449 Pa. Super. 81 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 15, 1996

[That] museum is a premier facility with personnel qualified to safely handle, exhibit and secure the Foundation’s art in a suitable environment. 7. … The Haus der Kunst is a premier art facility qualified to handle, exhibit and secure the Foundation’s art in a suitable environment. 3.