Case law

Commonwealth v. Stilley

455 Pa. Super. 543 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Jan 9, 1997

Peifer who was not qualified to render an expert opinion that the complaining witness was suffering from an overdose of GHB; (b) Mr. Stretton failed to conduct voir dire of Dr. … Hayes who was not qualified to render an expert opinion that the complaining witness was suffering from an overdose of GHB; (c) Mr.

Constantakis, K. v. Bryan Advisory

275 A.3d 998 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · May 5, 2022

Notably, once speech has been published, the speech and/or the speaker are no longer immune from consequences, including censure. Id. Indeed, Art. … “Depending upon the importance of the publisher’s actions to society, the privilege may be absolute or conditional/qualified.” Id. Compare Baird v.

Cruse v. Cruse

1999 Pa. Super. 202 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Aug 11, 1999

. ¶ 3 On February 2, 1998, one day after the due date of the first payment, Husband proposed a Qualified Domestic Relations Order (QDRO) to Wife, which attempted to substitute an installment distribution from his 401K plan … While the trial court clearly has discretion as to the amount and terms of the security pursuant to subsection (b), the security must, nonetheless, be filed as required by 1731(a) in order to effectuate the supersedeas.

Commonwealth v. Johnson

456 Pa. Super. 251 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Feb 17, 1997

In Hernandez , our court stated: *259 It follows that a pediatrician ..., qualified as a medical expert, may testify that the physical facts observed and reported by the treating physician were consistent with the allegation … The expert was not needed in order to prove consistency with established facts in the case.

Com. v. Grush, S.

295 A.3d 247 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Apr 11, 2023

As established by Crawford v. … Cain subsequently refused to testify, even after the trial court ordered him to do so based on the Commonwealth’s offering use immunity. Id.

In Re: B. Fiedler, Appeal of: E. Fiedler

132 A.3d 1010 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Jan 5, 2016

Clearly, Decedent’s inclusion of Latisha’s issue as secondary beneficiaries is indicative of the value Decedent placed on those relationships. … We do not agree that the record conclusively established Latisha’s lawful right to draw checks on the account.

Holz v. Holz

2004 Pa. Super. 181 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · May 24, 2004

Her claim does not involve the entry or terms of a qualified domestic relations order where state law would control. … Nevertheless, the district court decision clearly went beyond the scope of survivor-ship benefits and addressed the waiver in its totality.

Elliott v. Prudential Insurance Co. of America

76 Pa. Super. 534 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 5, 1921

That record and the opinion of the court, in entering judgment in favor of the defendant non obstante vere-dicto, clearly establish that there was no question raised concerning the validity of the policy as a contract of … “Res adjudicata concludes only the fact or facts expressly and distinctly decided, and those which might have been averred and proved to defeat or qualify those expressly and distinctly decided”: Reading Co. v.

Martachowski v. Orawitz

14 Pa. Super. 175 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Jul 26, 1900

The allegation of the injury to the plaintiff was clearly defined. “ The plaintiff further declares that the said defendant did not have any license granted to him for said house during said year, as he well knew, and by … In the making of the contract no illegal intent had been carried into execution. “ The law does not impose, as a penalty for such intent, immunity to him who has plundered one guilty of it.

Brodhead v. Pullman Ventilator Co.

29 Pa. Super. 19 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 19, 1905

But if the testimony of the plaintiff in the present case is to be credited, his efforts had not failed and it is not a fact which the court would have been warranted in declaring as conclusively established that the Produce … But entirely apart from the decisions relative to brokers’ commissions, the learned judge was clearly warranted by the terms of the special agreement in adding to his affirmation of the defendant’s sixth point the qualifying

Corey, L. v. Wilkes-Barre Hosp. v. PA Phys. Svcs.

307 A.3d 701 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Dec 11, 2023

Subsequent testing revealed a “clearly elevated blood pressure” as well as +2 proteinuria.2 Id. … Bulger without requiring a qualified surgeon to be available in case surgery was necessary and because its staff failed to notify the hospital that Welsh’s child needed a surgical delivery.” Id.

Rose v. Wissinger

294 Pa. Super. 265 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Jan 8, 1982

Burd, 486 Pa. 146 , 404 A.2d 672 (1979): It is axiomatic in the law of pleading that preliminary objections in the nature of a demurrer admit as true all well and clearly pleaded material, factual averments and all inferences … Public policy requires this, even if at times the privilege of immunity for false and malicious averments in pleadings is abused.

McDonald, E. v. Whitewater Challengers, Inc.

116 A.3d 99 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Apr 29, 2015

the intent of the parties; 3) the language of the contract must be construed, in cases of ambiguity, against the party seeking immunity from liability; and 4) the burden of establishing … the immunity is upon the party invoking protection under the clause

Baltimore & Ohio Railroad v. Veltri

37 Pa. Super. 399 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 12, 1908

Wifehood is as clearly defined a legal state or condition as that of widowhood. … There were no qualifying circumstances, and from the relief department’s standpoint, the intended beneficiary, if the applicant be married, must be his wife or his wife and children.

Commonwealth v. Foster

2000 Pa. Super. 343 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Nov 16, 2000

A plain reading of the statutes shows that an act which does not qualify as child abuse may still be done in a manner which causes death and thus qualifies as involuntary manslaughter. … The [Fosters] were not prejudiced nor were any fundamental legal principles misstated, including those concepts of establishment and exercise embodied in the First Anendment’s Constitutional protection of religion ...

In re McKinney

67 A.3d 824 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · May 21, 2013

Where the rules of law on which the court relied are palpably wrong or clearly inapplicable, we will reverse the court’s decree. … Our final line of inquiry is whether Appellant has established that a substantial change in circumstances has occurred.

Deynzer v. Columbia Gas of Pennsylvania, Inc.

2005 Pa. Super. 122 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Apr 4, 2005

The trial court found that PLHC was the party responsible for providing free gas under the lease as the duty was clearly assigned. ¶ 7 On October 6, 2003, the Deynzers commenced the instant action by filing a complaint in … Broder, 851 A.2d 944, 947 (Pa.Super.2004), appeal denied, — Pa. —, 868 A.2d 1201 , 2005 WL 405791 (Pa.2005) (Table). ¶ 10 The six essential prerequisites that a plaintiff must establish in order to qualify for injunctive

Allegheny Center Associates v. Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission

209 Pa. Super. 334 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 29, 1967

. 6 The testimony of Duquesne’s own witnesses reflects, therefore, that there was no requirement that a build *341 ing contain a preponderance of offices to qualify for single point service under old Rule 18. … The Commission’s finding that the center does not fall within that category is inconsistent with the established practice in Duquesne’s service area as reflected in the testimony of Duquesne’s own witnesses.

Commonwealth v. Bishop

1999 Pa. Super. 292 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Nov 24, 1999

Clearly, the testimony presented by the Commonwealth established that from the earliest point following the assault, M.B. told her mother what her pop-pop had done to her. … The record clearly establishes that M.B.’s mother entrusted Appellant with the care of M.B. while she visited with her sick mother in the hospital.

Von Cannon v. Philadelphia Transportation Co.

148 Pa. Super. 330 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 14, 1941

The eases cited and relied upon by counsel for appellee áre clearly distinguishable. Rodgers v. … Such cases are clearly recognized in “Restatement of the Law of Torts” as an exception to the general rule.