Case law

Caterpillar Financial Services v. Get Er Done

286 A.3d 302 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Nov 18, 2022

Did the [trial] court err in relying on evidence which was clearly controverted by evidence of [Get ‘Er Done]? 3. … While it is well-established that a witness may be qualified to render an expert opinion based on training and experience alone, see Miller v.

Denton v. SILVER STREAM NUR. & REHAB. CTR.

739 A.2d 571 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 7, 1999

Shirey, 456 Pa.Super. 668 , 691 A.2d 511, 513 (1997). ¶ 19 Here, we have a statute that clearly prohibits discharge—the afore-discussed Whistleblower Law. [2] This law represents our Commonwealth's public policy, as clearly … Although we determined that she failed to establish a valid claim for wrongful discharge, she had stated a valid claim under the Wage Payment and Collection Law.

Commonwealth v. Boyd

2007 Pa. Super. 379 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Dec 14, 2007

The wording of the statute is unambiguous, and clearly requires that as long as at the time of sentencing, a defendant ‘has been convicted’ of another qualifying ‘offense,’ the defendant shall receive the enhanced sentence … If the legislature enacts a statute which clearly expresses a different application, the “recidivist philosophy” possesses no authority which would override clearly contrary statutory language.

Com. v. Simpson, B.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 10, 2020

The crux of appellant’s claim on appeal is premised on his belief that his private property qualifies as a shooting range under Section 4501. … The interpretation of Section 4501 urged by appellant is clearly unreasonable.

In re Estate of Rosengarten

2005 Pa. Super. 112 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 24, 2005

Following a hearing on November 28, 2001, wherein it was established that Ms. … Cohen had offered to perform the same service at no fee and was qualified to do so. Ms. Rosengarten specifically asked that her father replace Ms.

In the Interest of: M.R., a Minor

247 A.3d 1113 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 1, 2021

Miller’s testimony clearly meets the … requirements under [Rule] 702. Dr. … We agree that DHS presented clear and convincing evidence to establish child abuse by Parents.

In Re JAS

820 A.2d 774 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 24, 2003

. § 2511(b), as termination clearly and convincingly meets the developmental, physical and emotional needs and welfare of this child. III. … (N.T., 12/4/01, at 54-63.) ¶ 17 Despite in-home services and other reunification plans and programs, the evidence established that the parents failed to progress toward the established goals. ¶ 18 Before discussing the evidence

Constitution Bank v. Olson

423 Pa. Super. 134 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Jan 8, 1993

Petition to Strike and/or Open Judgment, and Request for Stay of Proceedings”, wherein it was alleged, as herein relevant, that the judgment against the garnishees be stricken because the accounts were entireties property and immune … 747 (Citations omitted; emphasis added). *143 To the same effect, the Court in Brose’s Estate, 416 Pa. 386 , 206 A.2d 301 (1965), held that language utilized in ten bank accounts in the name of the decedent and his wife clearly

In Re: Risperdal Litigation Appeal of: W.C.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Nov 13, 2017

When we review a ruling on the admission or exclusion of evidence, including the testimony of an expert witness, our standard is well-established and very narrow. … The effect of Risperdal on a hormone such as prolactin is clearly a subject that requires specialized knowledge.

Commonwealth v. Focht

38 Pa. Super. 211 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Feb 26, 1909

There is no allegation that the indictment itself is not good, but that the evidence does not sustain it, and this, upon a careful examination of the testimony, we think is established. … The appellant construes this to mean that the court gave binding instructions to the jury to find the fact stated in the qualifying clause in the answer. We do not so construe it.

Commonwealth v. Dougherty

39 Pa. Super. 338 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · May 10, 1909

The commonwealth must, therefore, at the same time, uphold the enacting clause of subsection 5, and expunge *345 from it the qualifying proviso in order to maintain its position. … The very fact that it incorporated the proviso, along with the enacting clause in that subsection, *346 clearly indicated its intention to withdraw from the advanced position previously taken and bring the legislation of

Pennsylvania State University v. University Orthopedics, Ltd.

706 A.2d 863 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Jan 14, 1998

Arbitrary or suggestive marks are considered inherently distinctive and automatically qualify for trademark protection; while descriptive marks are afforded such protection only where “secondary meaning” — that consumers … Zimmerman is clearly distinguishable from the present case.

Commonwealth v. Smith

313 Pa. Super. 138 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Apr 15, 1983

Clearly, there is no dispute that the statement was voluntarily made. … The Commonwealth’s evidence clearly demonstrated the savage beating which resulted in the death.

Windows, H. v. Erie Insurance Exchange

2017 Pa. Super. 131 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · May 1, 2017

The “reasonably” qualifier is important: there is no ambiguity if one of the two proffered meanings is unreasonable. See Murphy v. Duquesne Univ. … Thus we [have said] that departure from the rule of coordinate jurisdiction is allowed where the prior holding was clearly erroneous and would create a manifest injustice if followed.

Commonwealth v. Yereb

705 A.2d 439 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Dec 15, 1997

Adopting Appellant’s position would create the odd situation where the legislature has established an offense without a penalty. The legislature could not have intended such a result. … This statement clearly indicates that he believed the testimony of Officer Rococi.

B.N. Excavating, Inc. v. PBC Hollow-A, L.P.

2013 Pa. Super. 120 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · May 17, 2013

A demurrer should be sustained only when the complaint is clearly insufficient to establish the pleader’s right to relief. Ellenbogen v. PNC Bank, 731 A.2d 175, 181 (Pa.Super.1999). … However, because reason- . able minds might differ regarding the interpretation of this language, we cannot hold that appellant has “clearly and without, a doubt” failed to allege sufficient facts to establish his right to

Britt v. Chestnut Hill College

429 Pa. Super. 263 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 13, 1993

In the present case, Appellant’s claim for breach of contract is clearly separate and distinct from Appellant’s remaining claim of defamation. … Appellant is clearly seeking compensation for different injuries.

Commonwealth v. Coleman

2006 Pa. Super. 214 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Aug 9, 2006

[Appellant] qualified for this program due to her multiple sclerosis. … Because [Appellant] was clearly capable of retaining counsel, but simply refused to do so, she forfeited her right to counsel.

Weightman's Estate

126 Pa. Super. 221 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Nov 13, 1936

Opinion by Cunningham, J., In January, 1935, William Walker Weightman, then a mental patient in Norristown State Hospital, to which he had been summarily committed in June, 1934, upon the certificate of two qualified physicians … Whether they should or should not be paid out of this incompetent’s estate cannot be judicially determined until all the circumstances under which the services were rendered have been established in due course of law.

Estate of Baehr

408 Pa. Super. 172 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Jul 16, 1991

In re Grand *180 Jury Proceedings (McCoy), 601 F.2d 162, 171 (5th Cir. 1979). 3 The requested accounting clearly meets the Grosso tripartite requirements. … Finally, a person who voluntarily enters a field where it is established that records must be kept, waives the privilege against incrimination as to the required records. State Real Estate Commission v.