Case law

J.T. Thomas Homes v. Destefano, A.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · May 15, 2026

Additionally, the DeStefanos’ evidence established that the entire home must be re-mortared. … merely because an appellate court might have reached a different conclusion, but requires a manifest unreasonableness, or partiality, prejudice, bias, or ill-will, or such lack of support so as to be clearly

Hennessey, C. v. Rom, W. v. Outercurve

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 20, 2015

Harrell, 65 A.3d 420, 430 (Pa.Super. 2013); see also Pa.R.E. 702 (adopting the Frye standard in subsection (c) and stating “A witness who is qualified as an expert by knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education … It is established that, “In the cases of a written contract, the intent of the parties is the writing itself.

Adoption of N.M.T., Appeal of: M.G.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 18, 2018

Whether the [t]rial [c]ourt erred and abused its discretion in concluding there was no legally qualified adoptive father currently seeking to adopt [] [C]hild in the within matter? V. … While the trial court ultimately denied the TPR Petition, section 2313(a) and L.B.M. clearly state that counsel must be appointed in an involuntary termination proceeding.

Com. v. Tillman, T.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 9, 2024

We directed the PCRA court to determine if Appellant qualified for appointed counsel. … On July 24, 2023, the PCRA Court held the ordered hearing, determined Appellant qualified, and appointed current counsel to represent Appellant.

Com. v. Hart, J.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Jan 13, 2026

At the ensuing jury trial, D.D., E.K., and multiple detectives and officers, including Detective Parkinson, established the above facts. … The trial court is free to use its own expressions as long as the concepts at issue are clearly and accurately presented to the jury. Commonwealth v.

Com. v. Crosby, A.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Dec 5, 2017

PCRA Court Opinion, 1/19/17, at 3 (omitting footnote 6, in which the court held that Appellant did not qualify for the PCRA’s one-year “grace period” until January 16, 1997, for defendants filing their first PCRA petition … Appellant’s petition filed on September 24, 2015 is clearly untimely.

In the Int. of: M.E.B.-H., Appeal of: M.H.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Nov 16, 2022

-H had not received routine medical care or immunizations since 2018, and both Mother and Father failed to address the behavioral health needs of M.Q.H. Id. at 20. … After considering all the evidence presented, the trial court concluded “there’s clearly no bond between the parents [and Children].

Bishops, Inc. v. Penn National Insurance

2009 Pa. Super. 225 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Nov 24, 2009

This was given a qualified affirmative answer by the court below. … identifies those portions of the policy which it does modify, and because the section of the policy under which coverage is sought is not so identified, the only rational conclusion is that the flood water exclusion, which is clearly

Com. v. Panick, S.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Nov 8, 2019

The fact that a person cannot perform the physically demanding sobriety tests does not necessarily establish intoxication; it also establishes that Ms. … Therefore, he was qualified to describe the “functions and side effects of [] Panick’s medications[.]” Panick’s Brief at 23.

Com. v. Mason, B.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 7, 2019

 Whether the video and non-verbal audio portions of the subject recording qualify as a protected “communication” under the Wiretap Act. … Here, the granting of Mason’s motion to exclude the recording is clearly the type of order that could impact the prosecution for the purposes of Rule 311(d), but the discrete decision to hear the motion is clearly not.

Com. v. Fountain, K.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Dec 14, 2023

Moorish sovereigns believe their status as members of a sovereign nation imparts immunity from federal, state[,] and local authorities. Moorish Sovereign Citizens, S. … It is well- established that for a waiver of counsel to be valid, a defendant must invoke a knowing, voluntary, and intelligent waiver, where he clearly understands the risks of abandoning that right.

Com. v. White, M.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Dec 29, 2020

Appellant has not established the trial court’s ruling was an abuse of discretion, and we do not disturb its consolidation order. … Appellant further alleged it was not established that he was the person depicted in the Facebook photos.

In Re: S.A.K., a Minor

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · May 17, 2016

The provisions of Section 251 l(a) establish six and twelve I' ,, lf J! month timelines. 23 Pa.C.S. § 251 l(a)(l), (a)(5), (a)(8). … Stevenson testified that Mother had two restaurant jobs, when a review of the record clearly indicates that Ms.

Com. v. Grandinetti, M.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Jun 18, 2024

Clearly they [are] asking for it. I understand the practice in this county. … They clearly want it. It clearly would aid them in their deliberations.

Terminations of Parental Rights to P.B.W.-V.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Jan 25, 2021

of the petitioners in the adoption proceeding. 23 Pa.C.S. § 2903; see also Adoption of R.B.F., 803 A.2d at 1199-1200 (remanding for a determination of cause pursuant to Section 2901 and stating, “Thus, absent a qualifying … [Appellants’] testimony clearly and unequivocally established that they had not married before instituting adoption proceedings because of their mistaken belief that Mother’s surname would automatically

Com. v. Ibrahim, R.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Apr 18, 2018

Ibrahim argues on appeal that the evidence presented to the jury did not establish the fire was intentionally set. … In light of all of these factors, we held that Rule [647] relief is not warranted unless prejudice has been established. Alston, 748 A.2d at 679.

Com. v. Johnson, D.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Jul 24, 2018

Finley, 550 A.2d 213 ____________________________________________ will not require courts considering PCRA petitions to struggle through the pro se filings of defendants when qualified counsel represents those defendants … -6- J-S37038-18 However, our review of the record clearly refutes any claim that Appellant was not fully advised of the prosecution’s plea offer.

Com. v. Shepard, G.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Jun 26, 2023

Moser was qualified as an expert witness in narcotics investigations[.] ([Id. at] 42, 44). … This sentence was manifestly excessive and clearly unreasonable.

Com. v. Gilliard, G.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Jun 26, 2026

Wood was qualified as an expert in child abuse pediatric medicine. Dr. … Additionally, Gilliard challenges whether M.J.’s testimony established certain elements of each crime.

Com. v. Rivera, N., Jr.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Jun 13, 2018

First, it moved to qualify Agent Andrew Sproat, a lead investigator in this case who posed as a heroin user, as an expert in voice recognition. N.T., 2/27/17, at 45-57, 61-66. … The trial court denied the Commonwealth’s motion because it failed to disclose before trial its intent to qualify Agent Sproat as an expert witness. Id. at 77-78.