Case law

In the Interest of: A.Z., a minor, Appeal of: Y.Z.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Apr 25, 2016

. … If the court finds that the child is not a dependent child or that the allegations of delinquency have not been established it shall dismiss the petition and order the child discharged … Commonwealth, including any relative, who, after study by the probation officer or other person or agency designated by the court, is found by the court to be qualified

Kohut, J. v. Vlahos, D.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Nov 29, 2022

The will, providing for one or more named beneficiaries, clearly manifests the intent of the testator to benefit the legatee. … However, while that will establishes Decedent’s intent to leave them his estate to Heirs at that time, it does not establish his intent to continue to leave his entire estate to Heirs after his marriage to

Com. v. Sanabria, R.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · May 2, 2022

Thus, Sanabria cannot establish PCRA counsel’s ineffectiveness in this regard. … So the only court case - - THE COURT: Yes, but [Roman] hasn’t been given immunity. And so, [trial counsel] if you wish to make that implication from it, you may[.]

Com. v. Wolowski, B.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Jul 27, 2021

…[T]he court, on August 22, 2017, entered an order appointing Jeremy Davis, Esquire as co-counsel, who was death qualified. … Breese on the night in question was completely irrelevant to establish who killed Mr. Mathias and shot Ms. Powell, where there was no evidence that Mr. Breese was involved. That Mr.

Guarnieri, C. v. Guardian Warranty Corp.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Jun 2, 2015

* * * When a medical leave ends, the employee will be reinstated to the same position, if it is available, or to an equivalent position for which the employee is qualified … Surprisingly, the trial court made such a requirement, which clearly devours a claim for wrongful discharge for filing a worker[’s] compensation claim.

Nonemacher, K. v. Nonemacher, S.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 3, 2025

Father made this same argument during the proceedings for the establishment of the child support Order. … Father's conduct was clearly clearly obdurate and vexatious.

Com. v. Fraunfelter, C.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Sep 30, 2025

As Trooper Ballentyne -5- J-A23045-24 was not qualified as an expert in signs of deception, Appellant contends that his testimony was improperly admitted. … Generally, a lay witness may only provide opinion testimony if the opinion is: (a) rationally based on the witness’s perception; (b) helpful to clearly understanding the witness’s testimony or

Com. v. Stough, R.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Feb 22, 2016

This comment clearly encompasses an element of sexual desire or gratification that is sufficient to establish a sexual component to Appellant’s actions. See Commonwealth v. Evans, 901 A.2d 528, 533 (Pa. … Further, as previously stated, 4952(b)(1)(ii) does require any level of pecuniary gain or benefit—it qualifies both pecuniary gain and other benefit with the word “any.”

Gammache, R. v. Shen, M., M.D.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Feb 9, 2021

[Counsel then] worked diligently to locate a qualified physician expert . . . and obtain an opinion on liability. 17. … The purpose of the rules in authorizing the entry of default judgments is to prevent a dilatory defendant from impeding the plaintiff in establishing his claim.

Commonwealth v. Helsel

2012 Pa. Super. 198 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Sep 14, 2012

According to the Shiffler Court, [t]his provision clearly reflects a recidivist philosophy approach. … In addition, we note that the facts and circumstances established by the Commonwealth need not preclude every possibility of innocence.

Com. v. Spivey, D.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Nov 1, 2016

Lieberman was qualified and testified as an expert in forensic pathology does not cure the denial of [Buford’s] right to confront Dr. Hunt. Id. at 1197–98. … The statements of Detective Pitts are not ambiguous: he clearly indicated that the reason they arrested Appellant is because both Mr. Cover and Mr.

Com. v. Morrison, L.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Nov 23, 2015

Accordingly, when an applicant qualifies and the Court grants a request for admission, that applicant is prioritized over other applicants. … Fowler clearly gives the trial court discretion to decide whether time spent completing this type of program should be credited towards a sentence.

Com. v. Kujawa, T.

2025 Pa. Super. 46 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Feb 25, 2025

Starks, however, aptly summarized the types of misconduct qualifying as “overreaching”: The United States Supreme Court has enunciated principally two types of prosecutorial overreaching. … In fact, the question was clearly limited to the allegations involving E.K.

Chiodetti, G. v. Fernandes, E

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Feb 6, 2015

Secondly, this is clearly bolstering the witness’ testimony. We’re on direct examination. [Chiodetti’s Counsel]: This is about establishing standard of care for the doctor. … A: I can’t keep answering yes to all these questions without being able to qualify them.

In the Int. of: J.L.B., Appeal of: A.M.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Apr 4, 2022

has clearly expressed she does not feel safe with Mother. … Adoption has been clearly established as the appropriate goal in the best interest of these Children and is best suited to the safety, protection and physical, mental and moral welfare of these

Com. v. Washington, D.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Nov 2, 2018

However, the court concluded Washington could not establish the modified photographs accurately depicted what the robber had been wearing on the night of the crime. … The court qualified Adams as an expert on computer science and statistics, but denied expert status on issues dealing explicitly with biology.

Melkir Capital v. Erie Insurance

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 7, 2018

Rather, it unambiguously provides that it covers only that property which qualifies as ‘Covered Property,’ and defines that property that does and does not qualify as such.” Erie’s Brief at 18 (citations omitted). … Asphalt clearly qualifies as a “paved surface.”

Com. v. Foy, J.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Jan 15, 2021

In this case, the totality of the evidence establishes that there was probable cause to search the backpack and its contents and the controlled substances in the backpack would have inevitably been … Here there was clearly probable cause for [Foy’s] arrest. In addition, a warrantless search is proper if incident to a lawful arrest. Commonwealth v.

Bade, D. v. Picone, R.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Jan 5, 2016

-8- J-A34033-15 The term “licensee,” when used in this section, shall mean those persons licensed under the provisions of Article IV, unless the context clearly … Testimony by Expert Witnesses 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

Com. v. Harvey, N.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Feb 25, 2015

Was the PCRA courts determination that trial counsel was not ineffective, clearly erroneous?. 3. … PCRA petition, PCRA hearing ) clearly erroneous, 5. Was the PCRA courts determination that appellant is barred from seeking Post-conviction Collateral Relief, clearly erroneous, 6.