Case law

Commonwealth v. Wynn

2000 Pa. Super. 271 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Sep 12, 2000

We recently restated our standard of review for claims challenging the constitutionality of a statute as follows: A statute will be found unconstitutional only if it clearly, palpably and plainly violates constitutional rights … pri- or convictions are non-qualifying felonies, was presented in United States v.

In the Interest of: D.R., Appeal of: D.R. and J.R.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Jul 26, 2019

We recognize that our trial judges are honorable, fair and competent, and although we employ an abuse of discretion standard, we do so recognizing that the judge himself is best qualified to … Clearly, this was insufficient to support the court's order compelling appellants to submit to a search of their home.

Com. v. Lange, D.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Dec 6, 2024

David Zehrung, was qualified as an expert in clinical psychology. N.T. 12/12/2022, p. 155-157. Dr. … Here, the jury clearly believed the Commonwealth’s evidence and found that Appellant’s intoxication did not negate his specific intent to kill. We will not substitute our judgment for that of the jury. See id.

Com. v. Benson, W., Jr.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 9, 2023

The first seven possibilities (sexual intercourse as separately defined, masturbation, sadism, masochism, bestiality, fellatio, or cunnilingus) are clearly not at issue. … We are unprepared to say whether the depiction of G.B. using the toilet would qualify as a lewd exhibition.

McGarry, R. v. Philly Rock Corp

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 15, 2015

[G]ross negligence is clearly more egregious than ordinary negligence. Ratti v. Wheeling Pittsburgh Steel Corp., 758 A.2d 695, 704-05 (Pa. Super. 2000) (citations and quotation marks omitted). … Voluntariness is established only when the circumstances manifest a willingness to accept the risk. Mere contributory negligence does not establish assumption of risk.

Commonwealth v. Mercado

437 Pa. Super. 228 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 27, 1994

The trial court has broad discretion in phrasing its instructions, and may choose its own wording so long as the law is clearly, adequately, and accurately presented to the jury for *241 its consideration. … However, to meet the burden of establishing a prima facie case, the Commonwealth must present evidence with respect to each of the material elements of the crime charged and to establish sufficient probable cause to warrant

Commonwealth v. Norris

819 A.2d 568 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 10, 2003

“Once a trial court has determined that the Commonwealth has established the requirements of a legislatively mandated sentence, the trial court has no discretion to deviate its sentence from that which is defined by statute … Subsection (e) clearly indicates that the sentencing court has no discretion to impose a lesser minimum sentence than that mandated by the applicable subsection, (a)(1) or (a)(2), as the case may be. ¶ 8 In the instant case

Com. v. Downward, J.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 14, 2022

Under the clarifying language of Act 2014-19, Downward was clearly included in the class of persons subject to the registration requirements contained in SORNA I. … Two offenses to which Downward pied guilty qualified him as a Tier Ill offender- statutory assault (18 Pa.C.S. §3122.1(b)) and involuntary deviate sexual intercourse (18 Pa.C.S. §3123).

Liberatore, L. v. Monongahela Railway Company

2016 Pa. Super. 79 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Apr 7, 2016

This is because the lost wages damages award is excluded from income under section 104(a)(2) of the [IRC], and a payment that does not qualify as income cannot qualify as wages. … The Plan provides, in relevant part: This Plan has been established and maintained in fulfillment of certain collective bargaining agreements.

Anderson v. Anderson

822 A.2d 824 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Apr 17, 2003

Clearly, this definition includes the appreciation of the antiques in question. ¶ 13 While Pa.R.C.P. 1920.33, Joinder of Related Claims. Distribution of Property. … The record failed to establish documentation of the debt, any history of repayment or other evidence of the debt's existence (id. at 12).

Goforth, M. v. Goforth, J.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Apr 21, 2025

This is clearly unsupported by the record. … Goforth has not established that Henderson has a lien on the marital property.

Com. Young, J.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Feb 3, 2026

However, Rule 1610 supplies further context since that Rule establishes “bail orders” as a “certain discrete issue” qualifying for review under Chapter 16. … Nonetheless, the trial court was clearly correct that, under governing law, Yard categorically bars bail.

Com. v. Bieber, E.

283 A.3d 866 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Sep 22, 2022

Under the second Holmes exception, a litigant need only establish good cause shown and expressly waive his PCRA rights to obtain unitary review. As discussed above, both those prongs were established in this case. … Rule 702 provides that: A witness who is qualified as an expert by knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education may testify in the form of an opinion or otherwise if: (a) the expert’s

Commonwealth v. Mollett

2010 Pa. Super. 153 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Aug 17, 2010

Cheatom’s car and had been at an establishment called Art’s Bar when Corporal Pokorny was shot. … The rule provides: If scientific, technical or other specialized knowledge beyond that possessed by a layperson will assist the trier of fact to understand the evidence or to determine a fact in issue, a witness qualified

Brown, J. v. Halpern, M.

202 A.3d 687 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Jan 4, 2019

Clearly, however, Appellants had the opportunity to cross-examine the three witnesses at their depositions in Florida. … These arguments, however, are based on a misapplication of well-established Pennsylvania law.

In the Int. of: D.R.-W., a Minor Appeal of: D.W.

2020 Pa. Super. 15 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Jan 29, 2020

. § 2511 (a), where the evidence showed that Father substantially complied with [SCP] goals established by [DHS]. 3. … Adoption has been clearly established as the appropriate goal in the best interest of these Children. Trial Court Opinion, 5/16/19, at 29-30. We again discern no error of law or abuse of discretion.

In the Int. of: A.M.G. Appeal of: Y.T.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Aug 12, 2014

of the circumstances clearly warrants termination. … concerns the nature and status of the emotional bond between parent and child, with close attention paid to the best care, A.M.G. had not been taken to her medical appointments and was likely behind on her immunizations

Trude v. Martin

442 Pa. Super. 614 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · May 9, 1995

the following averments of negligence by Equitable: failure to maintain the brick wall and landing in accordance with the BOCA code and the Pennsylvania Fire and Panic Act; failure to conduct a proper inspection with a qualified … The trial court has broad discretion in phrasing its instructions, and may choose its own wording so long as the law is clearly, adequately, and accurately presented to the jury for its consideration. Commonwealth v.

Gardner, S. v. Kamer, J.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Sep 16, 2021

Ruediger had removed all Gardner’s personal property from the Property in 2001, and possession of the property for the past 25 years is not established by the presence of such items. … of Gardner’s brief, we construe his issues to coalesce into the argument that his wrongful conviction of first-degree murder, which rendered him unable to continue payments under his written agreement with Ruediger, qualifies

Bombar v. West American Insurance Co.

2007 Pa. Super. 222 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Jul 26, 2007

It is well established that an insurer need only defend an insured in a claim if *87 the insurance contract provides coverage for a suit of that nature. … Cunitz was not qualified. We decline to become counsel for West American on appeal and will not develop this argument for it. See Pa.