Case law

Zimmiski v. Lehigh Valley Coal Co.

200 Pa. Super. 524 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Apr 18, 1963

A court does not have the right to decide purely factual matters or to substitute its findings for those of the board; its only function is to decide matters of law, Gill v. Fives, 170 Pa. … The courts have no power to reverse the board on a question of fact even when they feel that the weight of-the evidence is against the finding made by the board. Lorigan v. W. O. Gulbranson, Inc., 184 Pa.

Garrahan v. Glen Alden Coal Co.

135 Pa. Super. 307 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 6, 1939

The board made no finding of fact based on this inference as it was its duty to do if the evidence warranted and it was believed (Vorbnoff v. … “While there are authorities which sustain the principle announced in clause (c) (see Walcofski v. L. V. Coal Co., 278 Pa. 84 [ 122 A. 238 ]; Pokis v. Buck Run Coal Co., 286 Pa. 52 [ 132 A. 795 ]; Shoffler v. L. V.

Commonwealth v. Thorne

223 Pa. Super. 122 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Dec 11, 1972

Browning did have authority to consent to a search of the leased premises. As stated in United States v. … Cabey v.

Wolsko v. American Bridge Co.

158 Pa. Super. 339 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 23, 1945

The board, in support of its conclusion as to the burden of proof, relies upon Stauffer v. Susquehanna Collieries Co., 116 Pa. Superior Ct. 277 , 176 A. 740 , and Kuca v. … We are of the opinion that on the facts found by the board there remained only a question of law, and that the conclusions of the board and of the court below were erroneous. See Berlin v. Crawford, 86 Pa.

Ferrante v. Ferrante

123 Pa. Super. 74 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Apr 23, 1936

The court below had no power to set aside the findings of the board and reinstate the findings and award of the referee. We so held in Teresa Caruso v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, 99 Pa. … See Poluskiewicz v.

Cowan v. Bunting Glider Co.

159 Pa. Super. 573 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 9, 1946

Upon appeal, the board reversed the referee, and claimant appealed to the court below. … Flowers v. Balto. & Phila. R. R. Co., 132 Pa. 524 , 19 A. 274 ; Hoffman v. Bloomsburg & Sullivan R. R. Co., 143 Pa. 503 , 22 A. 823 ; Roberts v. Phila., 239 Pa. 339 , 86 A. 926 ; Wadsworth v.

In re T.B.

75 A.3d 485 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Jun 24, 2013

See Commonwealth v. … See Gates v. Gates, 967 A.2d 1024 (Pa.Super.2009). .

Elwyn v. DeLuca

2012 Pa. Super. 136 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Jul 2, 2012

He cites to Dodds v. … Smay v. E.R. Stuebner, Inc., 864 A.2d 1266, 1270 (Pa.Super.2004) (citations omitted).

Commonwealth v. Bradford

2010 Pa. Super. 142 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Aug 4, 2010

Commonwealth v. Browne, 526 Pa. 83 , 584 A.2d 902, 906 (1990). The failure to employ a diary or other record-keeping system shows a lack of due diligence. Id. … Browne, 584 A.2d at 905-06 .

Burgstahler v. AcroMed Corp.

448 Pa. Super. 26 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Dec 19, 1995

Lohr v. Medtronic, Inc., supra, 56 F.3d at 1349 . Accord: National Bank of Commerce v. Kimberly- *36 Clark Corp., 38 F.3d 988 , 998 (8th Cir.1994). See also: Brown v. … . -, 114 S.Ct. 86 , 126 L.Ed.2d 54 (1993); Moore v. Kimberly-Clark Corp., supra, 867 F.2d at 247 ; *42 Brown v. Medtronic, supra, 852 F.Supp. at 720-21 ; Bravman v.

Chiz & Dot's, Inc. Liquor License Case

211 Pa. Super. 320 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Dec 14, 1967

Opinion by Watkins, J., This is an appeal by the Pennsylvania Liquor Control Board from the order of the County Court of Allegheny County reversing the order of the Board suspending the license issued to Chiz & Dot’s, Inc … Kuca v. Lehigh Valley Coal Co., 268 Pa. 163, 166 , 110 A. 731 (1920); Pa. P. & L. Co. v. Public Service Commission, 128 Pa. Superior Ct. 195, 200 , 193 A. 427 (1937).

Fair S.B. L. v. Pres. B. of P.

98 Pa. Super. 409 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 17, 1929

*Page 412 Dorman subsequently, in January, 1927, got the defendants, Trustees of the Presbyterian Board of Publication and Sabbath School Work, to take an assignment of the mortgage. … Thompson, who was a creditor of Conrad Brown's estate, made a written agreement with Brown's administrator by which the latter agreed, in consideration of the satisfaction of her claim against the estate, to purchase the

Plum v. Hotel Washington

125 Pa. Super. 280 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 26, 1936

In Johnson v. Jeddo Highland C. Co., 99 Pa. … The rule laid down in Bausch v. Fidler, supra, was followed by us in Carson v. Real Estate-Land T. & T. Co., supra, and in Bonomo v. State Wk’s. Ins. Fund, 111 Pa. Superior Ct. 402, 405 , 170 A. 428 .

Walters v. Topper

139 Pa. Super. 292 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 24, 1939

Teachers’ Tenure Act Cases, supra (Swick v. Board of School Directors of School District of Borough of Tarentum), p. 239. … Langan v. Pittston School District et al., 335 Pa. 395, 397 , 6 A. 2d 772 . As said in McNulty v.

McGuire v. Dougherty & Jennings

119 Pa. Super. 485 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Apr 29, 1935

While the situation here is not exactly the same as in Higgins v. Com. C. & C. Co. et al., 106 Pa. Superior Ct. 1 , 161 A. 745 , (in which an appeal had been taken to the board), or in Wilson v. … It is. expressly provided by the amendment to Section 426 that no rehearing, upon the application of a party (Ellis v. Jones & Laughlin Steel Co., 111 Pa.

Cooke v. Edwards

15 Pa. Super. 412 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Nov 19, 1900

As said in Beatty v. Bordwell, 91 Pa. 438 , “No court would open a judgment merely on proof that the defendant had an account against the plaintiff equal to the amount of the judgment.” See also Rishel v. … Crouse, 162 Pa. 3 , Stroud’s Appeal, 109 Pa. 326 , and Thorpe v. Wegefarth, 56 Pa. 82 .

Long v. Marino Masse, Inc.

205 Pa. Super. 344 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Apr 15, 1965

Gadd v. Barone, 167 Pa. Superior Ct. 477 , 75 A. 2d 620 (1950) ; Thomas v. *348 Bache, 351 Pa. 220 , 40 A. 2d 495 (1945) ; 42 P.L.E. §304. … We are in agreement with the Board and the court below that six thousand ($6000) dollars was a reasonable counsel fee. Mazzeo v, M. & J. B. McHugh, 199 Pa. Superior Ct. 400 , 185 A. 2d 638 (1962).

Lehigh Valley Brewery Workers Home Ass'n Liquor License Case

154 Pa. Super. 141 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Dec 6, 1943

If it finds the facts in accordance with the findings of the board, it sustains the action of the board......If the facts so found are unchanged from the board’s findings, the penalty imposed by the board stands...... … The learned court below places stress on what we said in Commonwealth v. Mihalow, 142 Pa. Superior Ct. 433 , 16 A. 2d 656 , where defendant was charged with maintaining a gambling device.

Kucinic v. United Engineering & Foundry Co.

110 Pa. Super. 261 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Apr 24, 1933

Slemba v. Hamilton & Sons, 290 Pa. 267 , 188 A. 841 ; Vorbnoff v. Mesta Machine Co., 286 Pa. 199 , 133 A. 256 ; Israel v. Brisgol Bros., 104 Pa. Superior Ct. 16 , 159 A. 51 ; Calderwood v. Consolidated L. & S. … Superior Ct. 306, 309 ; Utzman v. Penna. Rubber Co., 96 Pa. Superior Ct. 463, 465 ; Grobuskie v. Shipman Koal Co., 80 Pa. Superior Ct. 349 ; Davis v. Davis, 80 Pa. Superior Ct. 343 ; Bakunas v. Phila. & R. C. & I.

Corbeil v. A. & P. STORES

213 Pa. Super. 1 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Sep 12, 1968

Justice Stern in Parks v. Miller P. Mach. … As the court below said: “If the Board had rejected Dr. Leventhal’s testimony, we would sustain the Board, since fact finding is within the province of the Board and not this Court. However, the Board did not reject Dr.