Case law

Cavoto, R. v. State Farm Mutual

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Dec 18, 2017

While plaintiffs failed to preserve an objection to the letter's authenticity, the objection of hearsay was clearly raised at the time of trial. … I'm qualifying this statement by saying, this is probably not what Mr.

Com. v. Leeks, B.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Sep 30, 2015

Although Appellant does not challenge his colloquy in this regard, the record clearly demonstrates that Appellant understood the questions posed during the colloquy. … GETTLE: You qualify for their services and Ms. [Mary L.] Klatt was representing you in this case. [APPELLANT]: I understand that. -7- J.S45036/15 MS.

Linde, S. v. Linde Enterprises, Inc.

118 A.3d 422 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Jun 9, 2015

-7- J-S02028-15 and until successors are duly-elected and have qualified or until earlier death, resignation or removal. … Summary judgment is appropriate only when the record clearly shows that there is no genuine issue of material fact and that the moving party is entitled to judgment as a _______________________________

Com. v. Kattupalli, G.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Aug 5, 2019

A statute duly enacted by the General Assembly is presumed valid and will not be declared unconstitutional unless it clearly, palpably and plainly violates the Constitution. … “It is well established that vagueness challenges to statutes which do not involve First Amendment freedoms must be examined in the light of the facts of the case at hand.” Id. (citation omitted).

Com. v. Jones, G.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Sep 27, 2017

Appellant has failed to establish a time-bar exception. He claims that he has established both the governmental interference exception and the newly discovered facts exception. … Such a source does not qualify as a fact unknown to the petitioner. Commonwealth v. Brown, 111 A.3d 171, 176 (Pa. Super. 2015), appeal denied, 125 A.3d 1197 (Pa. 2015).

Com. v. Nell, T.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Dec 15, 2020

The dip is clearly shown on the video because I hit it. … The Commonwealth further alleges the court attempted “to walk back [its previous] findings in open court of Officer Henry’s credibility in its [Rule] 1925(a) opinion, qualifying such a finding through post hoc limitations

Pullett, D. v. Pullett, C.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 8, 2018

To be ‘qualified,’ the order must contain certain required information and may not alter the amount or form of plan benefits.” Berrington v. … The order clearly does not state that. The trial court erred or abused its discretion when it issued an order that was not in conformity with Section 3701 of the Divorce Code.

In the Interest of: A.A., a Minor

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Jun 6, 2017

Matzo qualifies under that definition. 18 Pa.C.S. § 2702(c)(27). This particular aggravated assault crime is effectively a modified version of simple assault, 18 Pa.C.S. § 2701(a)(1). … She disputes the sufficiency of the evidence establishing her guilt of aggravated assault.

Com. v. Harper, A.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Aug 30, 2019

Harper asserts that the 11-second surveillance video does not clearly depict him as carrying a firearm. Id. At best, Harper asserts, the video established that he was running with a black object in his hand. Id. at 21 … Officer Yeaney had not been qualified as an expert, and his opinion testimony did not fall within the permissible bounds of lay opinion testimony under the Rules of Evidence.

Com. v. Leon, A.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Aug 9, 2019

examination during which [the trial court] and counsel for both parties clearly explained the issues with regard to the charges and sentencing"). … The instant record reflects Appellant's understanding of the guilty plea that he voluntarily chose to enter, as he was given an extensive qualifying examination during which this Court and counsel for both parties clearly

Donnelly, H. v. Donnelly, R.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · May 17, 2021

The agreement intended to establish fairness that would provide substantial tax relief for both parents. … Ultimately, the trial court determined: In 1997, the United States Congress enacted the Taxpayer Relief Act, which established the Child Tax Credit as an income tax credit for qualified dependents

St. Vladimir Ukrainian v. Saunders, S.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Apr 16, 2025

The Court found found that Petitioner established that Petitioner established P. … Inspector Inspector Rybakowski Rybakowski is qualified qualified to

Interest of L.T. & D.T., minors, Appeal of: A.Z.

158 A.3d 1266 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Apr 7, 2017

A party establishes good cause by showing that opening the proceedings will work a clearly defined and serious injury to the party seeking closure. … Our holding in In re M.S., supra, may appear to support the juvenile court’s position insofar as we affirmed a juvenile court’s order establishing adoption as the initial permanency goal.

Com. v. Mitchell, W.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Aug 5, 2019

A12033/19 It is also apparent from the record that the victim was clearly under duress, as she testified that she was shocked and confused; could not understand why appellant was attracted to her; did … The ex post facto clause of the Pennsylvania Constitution provides as follows: "No ex post facto law, nor any law impairing the obligation of contracts, or making irrevocable any grant of special privileges or immunities,

Com. v. Hughes, R.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 23, 2015

As discussed above, the evidence clearly placed defendant at the crime scene at the time of the arson. … Id Therefore, only where "[tjhe record clearly established that the testimony of that witness was so contradictory as to render it incapable of'reasonable reconciliation" must a verdict of guilty foil. Id.

Com. v. Thompkins, K.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Jun 3, 2021

She refused, which angered [Appellant] and established [his] motive to retaliate. As Ms. … Weigand’s training and experience had not been examined and thus she had not demonstrated that she was qualified to render an opinion on the subject.

In the Interest of: D.R.-D., Appeal of: J.R.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · May 31, 2023

O’Hara was qualified as an expert in the area of child and forensic psychology and he testified that although Mother was generally cooperative during the evaluation process, she did not assume responsibility for her circumstances … credible; Mother was incarcerated for 194 days of Child’s first three years of life; Mother has not obtained appropriate, safe housing in that her housing in Allegheny County has been unstable and her housing in Erie not clearly

Com. v. S.O.T.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · May 27, 2015

Based on his extensive credentials, the [c]ourt qualified Dr. Stein as an expert in sexual offender assessments. Dr. … Appellant insists the information contained in these documents made the SOAB expert’s opinion inadmissible because the information had not been established by testimony at the SVP hearing or by admission

Com. v. Graham, K.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Apr 22, 2021

In other words, the exception applies to prior bad acts “which are so clearly and inextricably mixed up with the history of the guilty act itself as to form part of one chain of relevant circumstances, and … In the first, he argues that the trial court erred in allowing Officer O’Neill to testify to his specialized knowledge and experience, even though he was never qualified as an expert. Graham’s Brief at 13-14.

Com. v. Almonte-Sena, Y.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Jun 11, 2026

computers and devices capable of internet access, such as smartphones, requires investigators to seize all electronic storage devices—along with related peripherals—to be searched later by a qualified … Read as a whole, the search warrant and affidavit provided probable cause to search for and seize the items enumerated in the warrant and clearly limited the scope of the search to evidence of the crime