Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
10,000+ results
2.64s
86 Pa. Super. 283 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Apr 22, 1925
The question is one of law reviewable by the courts (Stahl v. Watson Coal Co., 268 Pa. 452, 454 ; Callihan v. Montgomery, 272 Pa. 56, 62 ; Houlehan v. … It was stated in Riley v.
Cited 16 timesPublishedJ-J Bar, Inc. Liquor License Case
210 Pa. Super. 349 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Sep 14, 1967
The legislature intended that persons designated in the statute should be protected: Majors v. Brodhead Hotel, 416 Pa. 265 , 205 A. 2d 873 . … The order of the court below is reversed, and the order of the Board is reinstated. 1 On the same date the Board also issued a suspension order for a consecutive period of twenty days on Citation No. 127 of 1966.
Cited 7 timesPublishedBurger Unemployment Compensation Case
168 Pa. Super. 89 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Jan 12, 1951
The board, relying upon Deal Unemployment Compensation Case, 159 Pa. Superior Ct. 577 , 49 A. 2d 278 , and MacFarland v. Unemployment Compensation Board of Review, 158 Pa. … O’Farrell, 120 Col. 561 , 212 P. 2d 848 ; Jeffery-DeWitt Insulator Co. v. Nat. Labor Relations Board, 91 F. 2d 134 , 112 A. L. R. 948; McDougald v. N. Y. Life Ins. Co., 146 F. 674 (C, C.
Cited 33 timesPublishedIezzi v. Creamer Construction Co.
200 Pa. Super. 265 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 19, 1963
Walsh v. Penn Anthracite Mining Co., 147 Pa. Superior Ct. 328, 333 , 24 A. 2d 51 (1942) ; Seisek v. Blaw-Knox Co., 192 Pa. Superior Ct. 347, 349 , 162 A. 2d 33 (1960). The answer to this question is in the affirmative. … It was within the province of the board to weigh conflicting expert testimony as to cause of death, and to ac *268 cept or reject that of any witness. Malik v. Union town, 172 Pa.
Cited 5 timesPublishedMcLaughlin v. P. H. Butler Co.
122 Pa. Super. 139 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · May 5, 1936
The Board correctly ruled that the testimony of Dr. Wagner did not meet the requirements as to expert medical testimony laid down by the Supreme Court in Vorbnoff v. … Co., 283 Pa. 492, 495-6 ; Anderson v. Baxter, 285 Pa. 443 , 446-7”. The judgment is affirmed.
Cited 5 timesPublishedSchrock v. Stonycreek Coal Co.
152 Pa. Super. 599 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Apr 13, 1943
The only question before us is whether there is competent evidence to support the findings of fact of the board and whether the law has been properly applied to them. Kuca v. … Railroad Co., 277 Pa. 382 , 121 A. 325 ; Fillip v. Wm. Cramp & Sons Co., 80 Pa. Superior Ct. 68 ; Zelazny v. Seneca Coal Mining Co., 275 Pa. 397 , 119 A. 487 ; Hunter v.
Cited 19 timesPublished210 Pa. Super. 469 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Sep 15, 1967
The history of the alleged accident is succinctly set forth in Giordano v. Ralph J. Bianco, Inc., 204 Pa. … It is within the province of the board to weigh conflicting expert testimony as to the cause of death and to accept or reject that of any witness. Iezzi v. Creamer Construction Co., 200 Pa.
Cited 2 timesPublishedMicale v. Light & State Workmen's Insurance Fund
105 Pa. Super. 399 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Apr 12, 1932
The case is readily distinguishable from Jones v. P. & R. C. & I. Co., 285 Pa. 317 ; Boyle v. P. & R. C. & I. Co., 99 Pa. Superior Ct. 178 ; Dumbluskey v. P. & R. C. & I. Co., 270 Pa. 22 ; Senlock v. P. & R. C. & I. … Superior Ct. 156 ; Lacey v. Washburn & Williams Co., 105 Pa.
Cited 26 timesPublishedMoseman v. Arundel Corporation
156 Pa. Super. 318 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Nov 13, 1944
In Jester v. Electric Power Construction Co., 113 Pa. Superior Ct. 177 , 172 A. 154 , upon which claimant relies, the situation was reversed. … The power of the board in this respect cannot be challenged so long as it does not thereby defeat the humanitarian purposes of the statute. Seit *321 zinger v. Ft. Pitt Brewing Co., 294 Pa. 253 , 144 A. 79 .
Cited 6 timesPublished153 Pa. Super. 20 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Apr 13, 1943
Ellis v. American Academy of Music, 120 Pa. 608 , 15 A. 494 ; Saccone v. West End Trust Company, 224 Pa. 554 , 73 A. 971 ; Oliver v. Ormsby, 224 Pa. 564 , 73 A. 973 ; Rhoads v. Walter, 61 Pa. Superior Ct. 43, 47 . … Whitaker v. Brown, 46 Pa. 197 ; Richardson v. Clements, 89 Pa. 503 ; Kister v. Reeser, 98 Pa. 1 ; Danner v. Elliott, 76 Pa. Superior Ct. 350 . This he completely *25 failed to do.
Cited 16 timesPublished184 Pa. Super. 356 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 1, 1957
The action of the board in refusing the license was sustained by the lower court as a proper exercise of discretion by the board. … West Penn Power Company v. Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission, 174 Pa. Superior Ct. 123, 128 , 100 A. 2d 110, 113 . In 425-429, Inc. Liquor License Case, supra, 179 Pa.
Cited 8 timesPublishedGeneral Equipment Manufacturers v. Westfield Insurance
430 Pa. Super. 526 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Dec 6, 1993
(Coco Brothers) entered into a contract with the School Board of Pittsburgh (School Board) to renovate the Oliver High School. … School Board contained a compulsory arbitration clause.
Cited 50 timesPublished2022 Pa. Super. 38 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Feb 28, 2022
Commonwealth v. Cox, 146 A.3d 221, 228 (Pa. 2016) (citations and quotation marks omitted). See also Commonwealth v. Small, 238 A.3d 1267, 1273 n.1 (Pa. 2020); Commonwealth v. … See Commonwealth v.
Cited 1 timesPublishedMorgan Unemployment Compensation Case
176 Pa. Super. 297 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Jul 13, 1954
The Board affirmed, but held claimant ineligible under §402(e) of the Act. On appeal this Court remanded the case to the Board for further hearings. In our opinion, Morgan v. Unemployment Compensation Board, 174 Pa. … The Board has since held a new hearing, at which the previously excluded testimony was heard, vacated the prior findings and substituted new findings, and has again refused benefits under §402(e).
Cited 10 timesPublished153 Pa. Super. 10 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · May 5, 1943
The board found that deceased stood in loco parentis to her two grandchildren, and that they were members of her household at the time of her death. As we have said in Brovdy et al. v. … Appellants concede that the board could do this. See section 426 of the Workmen’s Compensation Act of 1915, as amended by Act of June 21, 1939, P. L. 520, §1, 77 PS §871; Manley v. Lycoming Motors Corp. et al., 83 Pa.
Cited 9 timesPublishedBrandenburg v. J. Boos Dairies
105 Pa. Super. 25 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 12, 1931
Hecla *28 Coal & Coke Co., 296 Pa. 34 , no one saw the deceased fall, hut the board had the right to draw the proper inferences as to what caused his death: Krischunas v. P. & R. C. & I. Co., 296 Pa. 216 ; Labuck v. … In Zelazny v.
Cited 3 timesPublished290 Pa. Super. 76 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Aug 14, 1981
See, e. g., Commonwealth v. Brown, 482 Pa. 130 , 393 A.2d 414 (1978) (motive for prior killing identical with that for instant killing); Commonwealth v. … Commonwealth v. Roman, 465 Pa. 515, 527 , 351 A.2d 214, 220 (1976). See also Commonwealth v. Brown, 280 Pa.Super. 303 , 421 A.2d 734 (1980).
Cited 9 timesPublished212 Pa. Super. 319 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Jun 13, 1968
The board may, upon cause shown, extend the time provided in this article for taking such appeal...”. Although this statute does give the Board “upon cause shown” the right to extend the time, we held in Morgan v. … Banks v. McClain, 156 Pa. Superior Ct. 512 , 40 A. 2d 905 (1945). In Miles v.
Cited 3 timesPublishedChristensen v. Rust Engineering Co.
189 Pa. Super. 88 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 18, 1959
Cunningham v. Guerrina & Sons, 188 Pa. Superior Ct. 288 (1958). “It is not our duty to reconcile conflicting medical testimony nor to review as a matter of law the credibility of medical witnesses.” Visnic v. … See also: Gasior v. Pittsburgh, 188 Pa. Superior Ct. 371 , 146 A. 2d 320 (1958).
Cited 2 timesPublished434 Pa. Super. 250 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Jun 2, 1994
The board’s authority, however, “will not be infringed upon by'a court’s substituting its judgment for that of the viewers.” Driver v. … Accord: In re Laying Out and Opening a Private Road, supra; Mandracchia v. Stoney Creek Real Estate Corp., supra; Lara, Inc. v. Dorney Park Coaster Co., Inc., 369 Pa.Super. 27 , 534 A.2d 1062 (1987).
Cited 8 timesPublished
Ask Donna