Case law

In Re: P.G.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Feb 2, 2023

Appellant’s Brief at 4 (formatting altered).5 Appellant argues that Hospital failed to establish by clear and convincing evidence that, Appellant either acted in a manner that established a reasonable probability … First, the petitioner, at a hearing, must “reestablish” the patient’s prior conduct, which qualified as a clear and present danger to himself, to others, or both, “in fact occurred[,]” and second, the petitioner must establish

Com. v. Zawierucha, J.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Aug 7, 2015

The jury was inflamed by the three (3) Commonwealth witnesses that were granted immunity in this matter. … You have the qualified right to bail under Pa. R. Crim. P. 521(b) [Pa. R. Crim. P. 720(4)(d)]. Pursuant to Pa. R. Crim.

Com. v. Green, T.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Feb 6, 2020

ruling regarding the admission of evidence will not be disturbed on appeal unless that ruling reflects manifest unreasonableness, or partiality, prejudice, bias, or ill-will, or such lack of support to be clearly … Super. 2001) (stating that a defendant must establish more than a mere assertion that disclosure of the CI’s identity “might be helpful.”).

In the Int. of: C.A.H., a Minor

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Jun 25, 2026

Sherry Moroz…, a qualified Forensic Interviewer at the CAC, testified that she interviewed the [victim] on July 8, 2024. … Sherry Moroz (Moroz), a qualified Forensic Interviewer at the CAC, testified that she j interviewed the VC on July 8, 2024.

Hart Trucking v. Robb H, Inc.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · May 11, 2015

They assert Appellees failed to identify any evidence that Hawthorne knew or should have known that Wojdalski was not qualified to install a torch down rubber roof. Id. at 51-52. … The employer’s liability rests on proving both factors, otherwise the employer is immune from liability for a claim of negligent selection of an 9 Cf. Kituskie v.

Com. v. Campbell, G.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Sep 5, 2018

J-A14010-18 RELATED MARKET STREET WEST DEMOLITION AND DEVELOPMENT DOCUMENTS OF THE IMMUNITY WITNESS— ARCHITECT PLATO MARINAKOS, AND PROVIDE THAT DETAILED LIST AND ALL NAMED RECORDS … on introduction of hearsay evidence, absent applicable hearsay exception; Appellant could present evidence relevant only to criminal charges against him and his culpability, and results of investigations by properly qualified

Jacks Auto v. MJ Auto Body

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Sep 25, 2023

Further, the party petitioning to open a judgment bears the burden of establishing such relief. See id. … The law does not establish a specific time period within which a petition to open a judgment must be filed to qualify as timeliness.

Valley Forge Military v. O'Brien, W.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Dec 10, 2019

In his remaining issue presented, Appellant argues his witness, Robert Wood, had experience dealing with disciplinary procedures during his time as the Dean of Students and Title IX Coordinator at VFMA, which qualified … Testimony by Expert Witnesses A witness who is qualified as an expert by knowledge, skill, -8- J-A15016-19 experience, training, or education may testify in the

Hall, R. v. 21st Century Preferred

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Dec 7, 2015

established that she attempted to file an appeal, but unforeseeable and unavoidable events precluded her from actually doing so. … Accordingly, counsel’s actions do not constitute non-negligent happenstance, and 21st Century has failed to establish entitlement to relief.3 Order affirmed.

Lewis, W. v. Lewis, C.

234 A.3d 706 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Jun 12, 2020

It does not imply intentional wrong or bad faith, or misconduct, nor any reflection on the judge but means the clearly erroneous conclusion and judgment—one that is clearly against logic … On this issue, we “recognize that our trial judges are honorable, fair and competent” and that “the judge himself [or herself] is best qualified to gauge his [or her] ability to preside impartially.”

Com. v. Enyeart, R.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Jun 2, 2022

admitted evidence). 8 To the extent Appellant argues that the court should have stricken testimony about how hot/cold the hood of Appellant’s car should have been and regarding the tire tracks where the court did not qualify … Rather, the role of the trial judge is to determine that notwithstanding all the facts, certain facts are so clearly of greater weight that to ignore them or to give them equal weight with all the

In the Interest of: Y.W.-B. Appeal of: J.B.

2020 Pa. Super. 245 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 8, 2020

J-A01010-20 Department of Human Services (DHS).1 Mother claims that DHS failed to establish probable cause to compel her cooperation with a home visit. … Instead, the court rejected the officers’ claim of qualified immunity where even in the absence of a First Amendment right to record from the confines of one’s home, the officers were not justified in entering the plaintiff

US Bank v. Hunter, M. & T.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Dec 23, 2024

known as the “Homeowners Emergency Mortgage Assistance Program” requires any mortgagee who desires to foreclose upon a mortgage to send the mortgagor at his or her last known address a notice informing them that they may qualify … This is due to the fact that, apart from the mortgagee, the mortgagor is the only party who would have sufficient knowledge on which to base a specific denial and thus clearly know whether the allegations in a complaint

Com. v. Maconeghy, Jr., K.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Jun 12, 2015

Novinger’s statement that he based his opinion on “the history [she] provided to me [which] pretty clearly indicated that she was sexually abused.” N.T., 1/21/14 at 219, 229. … (2) If qualified as an expert, the witness may testify to facts and opinions regarding specific types of victim responses and victim behaviors.

Weishner, T. v. Weishner, D.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Feb 26, 2016

Paragraph five of the equitable distribution order addressed Wife’s J-A35024-15 entitlement to a portion of Husband’s SERS pension in the amount of $2,000.00 per month and the preparation of a qualified … Paragraph 5 clearly states that Wife is entitled to $2,000.00 per month from Husband’s SERS pension.

Com. v. Corbin, A.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Apr 19, 2016

Gallagher's identification was more qualified and tentative than Spearman's. … The instant case is clearly distinguishable from Billa.

Grady, P. v. Aero-Tech Services

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 8, 2022

Plaintiffs did not argue that the PIC was not properly qualified to pilot the subject aircraft under FAA regulations. … Federal regulations clearly delineate standards for the certification and operation of Part 14l schools.

Com. v. Lawrence, W., Jr.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Sep 13, 2019

As such, Appellant argues Cameron should not have been qualified as an expert. … Clearly, Ms. Cameron meets this requirement given her background and experiences, and she testified to the same.

Com. v. Torres, J.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · May 31, 2018

Appellant contends that Light “clearly states ‘psychiatric testimony should be admissible as to . . . the subjective element of the defendant’s state of mind at the time of the occurrence.’” … Key was not qualified as an expert to testify as a psychiatric expert regarding [Appellant’s] subjective state of mind. As he was not qualified as an expert, Mr.

Com. v. McGhee, R.

2020 Pa. Super. 80 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 31, 2020

B) By permitting a Philadelphia Police Detective to give expert opinion testimony as to the concept of “grooming” when that officer was never qualified to be an expert witness; C) … [Victim] clearly was unable to discern between right and wrong during her sexual relationship with Appellant.