Case law

Trust Est. Under Agreement of Sarah Mellon Scaife

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · May 23, 2022

Documents, otherwise subject to discovery, cannot be immunized by depositing them in the lawyer’s file. The Rule is carefully drawn and means exactly what it says. … Accordingly, there is no evidence that the information qualifies as privileged under comment f to the Restatement (Third) of Trusts.

Com. v. Pizarro, J.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Jun 5, 2026

The Commonwealth presented testimony from, inter alia: Cannon; Detective -2- J-S18011-26 Nicholas Scianna, qualified as an expert in firearm examination and tool marking; Reedy … Whether the Commonwealth established sufficient evidence to overcome Appellant’s claim of self-defense where the Commonwealth’s own evidence showed that [V]ictim had a firearm and manipulated the

Com. v. Wright, E.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Sep 7, 2022

Manno stated, “recidivism tends to decline with age, [but Appellant] clearly recidivated even after he was over 60 years of age.” Id. at 23; see also id. at 39-42, 44-47 (Trial Counsel cross-examining Ms. … The burden of proof is on the proponent to establish the expert meets the criteria of Rule 702. Commonwealth v. Walker, 92 A.3d 766, 790 (Pa. 2014).

Com. v. Miles, J.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Apr 17, 2015

To be timely, the statue clearly states that a petition invoking one of the exceptions must be submitted within 60 days of when it first could have been presented. 42 Pa.C.S.A. § 9545(b)(2). … Edmiston, 65 A.3d 339, 352 (Pa. 2013) (holding that to qualify for the ____________________________________________ 1 Within his brief, Appellant raises a claim that all prior counsel were ineffective for failing to discover

In Re: Adoption of: A.M.L., Appeal of: J.R.B.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Nov 12, 2021

totality of the circumstances clearly warrants termination. … The evidence clearly and convincingly established that for “at least six months[, Father] evidenced a - 12 - J-S32001-21 settled purpose of relinquishing parental claim to [Child

Com. v. Foster, J.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Jul 17, 2023

Also, the totality of the circumstances test does not limit our inquiry to an examination of only those facts that clearly indicate criminal conduct. … Next, Appellant contends that the trial court erred by admitting expert testimony by Officer Powers when he was not qualified to provide such testimony.

Com. v. Merringer, M.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Nov 6, 2023

Bowman to refrain from providing opinion evidence until she was qualified. Id. at 3.19. The court qualified Ms. … The Commonwealth established that Corporal Reynolds had been trained in criminal investigation, specifically in interviews and interrogations.

Lewis, N. v. Toyota Motor Corp.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 2, 2014

The standard of review of a trial court’s admission or exclusion of evidence, including the testimony of expert witnesses, is well-established and narrow: These matters are within the sound discretion of the trial … appellate court might have reached a different conclusion, but requires a result of manifest unreasonableness, or partiality, prejudice, bias, or ill-will, or such lack of support so as to be clearly

Paul v. Lankenau Hospital

375 Pa. Super. 1 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · May 24, 1988

Clearly the jury found that Lankenau made a promise which it should reasonably have expected to induce a definite action or forbearance by Paul. … A cause of action has been held to exist only in limited circumstances, where the conduct has been clearly outrageous, as in Papieves v.

Com. v. Wheeler, A.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Apr 18, 2018

Cooper, 566 U.S. 156 (2012), recognized a new Constitutional right and therefore qualifies for the newly- recognized right exception set forth in § 9545(b)(1)(iii). … Therefore, the PCRA court did not err in concluding this claim did not establish a timeliness exception.

Trust Est. Under Agreement of Sarah Mellon Scaife

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · May 23, 2022

It immunizes the lawyer’s mental impressions, conclusions, opinions, memoranda, notes, summaries, legal research and legal theories, nothing more. Id. … Accordingly, there is no evidence that the information qualifies as privileged under comment f to the Restatement (Third) of Trusts.

Blackburn, J. v. King Investment Group, LLC

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Jul 6, 2017

It is also well established that a witness may be qualified to render an expert opinion based on training and experience. Formal education on the subject matter of the testimony is not required…. … Further it was established that [] Tait’s testimony was based on a limited review of the relevant contract provisions, [O’]Connor’s estimate, and the testimony at trial.

Com. v. Cartegena, I.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Nov 29, 2021

It is well-established that counsel is presumed effective. Commonwealth v. Ali, 10 A.3d 282, 291 (Pa. 2010). … At trial, and while enjoying full immunity, Mark Plaire testified that he did not see Petitioner possessing or using a gun.

Com. v. Ialongo, F.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Apr 21, 2015

Only where the record on appeal clearly establishes the my daughters Alibi, and assured me, he was doing all he can for my son, [Ialongo]. Amended PCRA Petition, 4/11/2011, Exhibit B. … Was his identification positive or was it qualified by any hedging or inconsistencies?

Com. v. Lites, B.

2020 Pa. Super. 152 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Jun 29, 2020

We then addressed the sole challenge raised in the Anders brief, which was that the victim “clearly had difficulty recalling numerous facts about the alleged attack [and that] counsel for the Commonwealth and the judge … The standard of review follows: The scope and standard of review applied to determine the legality of a sentence are well established.

In The Int. of: J.L., a Minor

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Sep 4, 2015

The record clearly reflects that Father made no attempts to form a relationship with Child. … [Child] is up to date with all of his immunizations. The foster parents also meet [Child’s] emotional needs. Ms.

Com. v. Garnett, R.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 27, 2017

After the trial court qualified Officer Donohue as an expert in “illegal drugs, drug distribution and drug investigation[,]” defense counsel also requested that he be qualified as an expert on “weight as well.” … Constructive possession may be established by the totality of the circumstances.

Datts, R. v. Little, A.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Feb 2, 2023

Here, the trial court indicated that the record clearly reflected that it credited Mr. Datts’s evidence concerning the property that Mr. Little retained, and that its verdict was expressly for Mr. Datts “entirely.” … See, e.g., Hayward, supra at 236 (holding extraordinary circumstances existed to modify a qualified domestic relations order six years after its entry where the order’s indication of an improper coverture fraction was

Com. v. Morton, C., Jr.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Aug 26, 2020

Segura immunity, the trial court ordered her to testify. N.T., 3/18/19, at 27. Ms. … Clearly, this employment of the knife was not in a manner consistent with a lawful use.

Com. v. Gray, S.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Sep 27, 2017

Defendant is in possession of written documentation from a previously unknown witness that constitutes new evidence and should be investigated and evaluated by the court in light of the fact that it clearly … “To qualify for an exception to the PCRA's time limitations under subsection 9545(b)(1)(ii), a petitioner need only establish that the facts upon which the claim is based were unknown to him and could not have been ascertained