Case law

Com. v. Pepe, D.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Apr 14, 2026

Clearly, the information in a motion filed in 2004 would not qualify for a timeliness exception at this time. Pepe further relies upon the Commonwealth’s brief filed in this Court in 2010. … This information was known to Pepe in 2010 and cannot now establish a timeliness exception.

R.C. v. J.S.

957 A.2d 759 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Sep 18, 2008

7 In its opinion, the trial court rejected Mother’s challenge to the hearing officer’s recommendation for two reasons: Based upon the facts elicited at the support modification hearing, it is clear that Mother does not qualify … Under the circumstances, an abrogation of the child support obligation of Father is simply unwarranted. ¶ 16 We also observe that it is well established that a child support order can be modified only upon a substantial change

Epstein v. Saul Ewing LLP

2010 Pa. Super. 190 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 15, 2010

Kan-ter claimed immunity. The federal district court concluded that Ms. Kanter was not immune from suit, and on appeal, the Third Circuit affirmed the district court’s decision that Ms. … Thus, Appellees were not given an opportunity to establish why they did not act with wrongful intent when they refused to provide Ms.

In Re: J.C.B., Appeal of: J.C.B.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · May 26, 2026

In so doing, to expend principal, without further review of the court, only as needed to qualify for medical assistance long-term care. … -6- J-A08047-26 law on which the court relied are palpably wrong or clearly inapplicable, we will reverse the court’s decree.

J.M. v. K.W.

2017 Pa. Super. 167 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · May 31, 2017

Nevertheless, we found that the evidence adduced during the relocation hearing established that the proposed move constituted a relocation. … There still has not been a formal determination of the children’s best interest that would qualify as a “final” order. 4 Hence, the interim order was temporary in name only.

Camp Construction Corp. v. Lumber Products Co.

311 Pa. Super. 381 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 4, 1983

Similarly, Kish’s testimony established that the supports, “the trusses [,] were all in accordance to specifications.” … Well, you can clearly see that the plywood is five plies thick. Some of the top plies came off, some of the delamination was in the center plies, it was not on the top ply.

Fitzpatrick, V. v. Toll PA IV

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Dec 19, 2024

Toll argued that in the Master Construction Agreement, BSG explicitly waived WCA immunity as to Toll. … The “reasonably” qualifier is important: there is no ambiguity if one of the two proffered meanings is unreasonable.

Zitelli v. Dermatology Education & Research Foundation

409 Pa. Super. 219 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Jan 13, 1992

Due to the necessity of paying competitive salaries to attract the highest qualified physicians to the University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, clinical practice plans were developed as a method to supplement physician … In an equity case, the findings of the Chancellor will not be reversed unless it appears he has clearly abused *227 his discretion or committed an error of law. Werner v.

Com. v. Thompson, W.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Feb 13, 2024

Regarding Billie Jo Tashe, the PCRA court noted that she was Appellant’s “girlfriend at the time of these homicides” but “clearly made herself unavailable; was clearly unwilling to cooperate as demonstrated by her disappearance … The PCRA court also determined that Appellant failed to plead and prove that trial counsel was not capital qualified at the time of trial and, instead, only offered evidence that trial counsel “was not qualified (for a period

Com. v. O.P.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Aug 13, 2021

Further, “[w]hether a witness has been properly qualified to give expert witness testimony is vested in the discretion of the -6- J-S17015-21 lower court.” … “The court clearly considered and assessed the information and testimony provided by both experts, and did not abuse its discretion in affording weight to the evidence as it did.” Id. at 15.

Com. v. Jay, J.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Jun 18, 2026

[T]estimony established that on February 15, 2024, the high was an J-A06014-26 unseasonably warm 56 degrees. … Ultimately, as detailed above, the trial court determined that “[t]he evidence established that Appellant violated 18 Pa.C.S.A. § 5532(a)(2).” Trial Court Opinion, 7/16/2025, at 4.

Com. v. Sanders, D.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Sep 30, 2021

In addition, we note that the facts and circumstances established by the Commonwealth need not preclude every possibility of innocence. … Accordingly, we conclude that the statements the victim made to her family member qualified as an excited utterance and an exception to the rule against hearsay.

Eddystone Fire Co. v. Continental Insurance

284 Pa. Super. 260 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Feb 13, 1981

We first dispose of Continental's challenge to the adequacy of the evidence establishing its liability. … It would depend on whether that one was qualified to perform such an examination. In my own case, yes, absolutely. That would be one of the first places I would look.

Peoples Natural Gas Co. v. Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission

153 Pa. Super. 475 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Apr 29, 1943

But clearly such opportunity should be, and we assume will be, given when the case is returned for further consideration. … Under the decision the order for refunds prior to the effective date of the new rates was clearly erroneous.

L.M.P. v. E.C.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 26, 2016

The Appointment Order also established Appellant’s rate of compensation at $75 per hour for out-of-court time and $100 per hour for in-court time, and provided for equal payment by Mother and Father. … S62018/16 unreasonableness, partiality, prejudice, bias, ill-will, or such lack of support in the law or record for the award to be clearly erroneous.” Id.

In Re: Estate of Hirnyk, M., Appeal of: Weiblinger

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Jan 29, 2016

“A document itself qualifies as hearsay when it contains such hearsay statements.” … Detective Cortazzo’s testimony was sufficient to establish the reliability and admission of the police reports.

Commonwealth v. Leatherbury

269 Pa. Super. 194 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Aug 17, 1979

This Court refused to reverse the conviction, stating, at page 1033: "It is well-established that a magistrate's finding that the Commonwealth has not established a prima facie case is not a final determination, such as an … It would thus appear that difficulties in scheduling the preliminary hearing, attributable to a defendant, do not cause "delay in the proceedings" qualifying them for Pa.R.Crim.P. 1100(d) analysis.

Dubose, R. v. Quinlan, M.

125 A.3d 1231 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 23, 2015

where the Survival Act claim was clearly -4- J. … Lopez is President and CEO of the Harris Health System in Houston, Texas, and was qualified as an expert.

Pennsy Supply, Inc. v. Mumma

2007 Pa. Super. 77 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 20, 2007

In other words, in order for Penn-sy’s first argument to stand, this Court would have to assume that Pennsy has established that it is likely to prevail on the merits of its trespass and nuisance counts. … the Defendants] based upon actions they took in October of 2005 without acknowledging or considering additional actions taken subsequent to October of 2005 that were known to the court, and to counsel for [Pennsy], that clearly

McIntyre Square Associates v. Evans

2003 Pa. Super. 214 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · May 30, 2003

First City ignores, however, the qualifying language at the end of this phrase: “or that would otherwise operate as a discharge of any Guarantor as a matter of law.” Id. (emphasis added). … Our scope of review of an order granting or denying a motion for summary judgment is well established: We view the record in the light most favorable to the non-moving party, and all doubts as to the existence of a genuine