Case law

In the Int. of: S.S., a Minor

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Feb 15, 2022

The ____________________________________________ 6 Ultimately, Hine was qualified as an expert at the denial hearing, and her report was entered into evidence. N.T. Denial Hearing, 8/14/20, at 14, 18. … With regard to his claim that K.H. was not sworn in at trial, S.S.’s brief is entirely deficient in establishing this claim.

In the Interest of: N.D., a Minor

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Aug 23, 2016

The results of the genetic test established paternity between Father and Child. On November 5, 2014, a child permanency plan was court-approved for Father, which set the goal of reunification with Child. … These statutory mandates clearly place the trial court’s focus on the best interests of the child. In re S.B., 943 A.2d 973, 978 (Pa.

Kowalczyk, B. v. Bollen, F.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Jul 30, 2018

The law does not establish a specific time period within which a petition to open a judgment must be filed to qualify as timeliness. … Here, the trial court found that the damages sought by Kowalczyk were a sum certain: The damages sought . . . were clearly and concretely stated in his Complaint.

Com. v. McMillan, T.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · May 16, 2025

and of his complicity therein, though the person claimed to have committed the offense has not been prosecuted or convicted or has been convicted of a different offense or degree of offense or has an immunity … to which Sierra responded, “Waiting on this bitch,” thereby clearly indicating Sierra and Perrotta were not together at that time.

Com. v. Spearman, A.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Aug 23, 2016

The PCRA court, after hearing all the testimony and reviewing the record, clearly found appellant’s testimony on the issue to be not credible. (PCRA court opinion, 6/12/15 at 14.) … S30018/16 merit where appellant failed to establish that, in fact, there was a negotiated plea agreement.

Com. v. Savage, J.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Sep 29, 2022

regarding the admission of evidence will not be disturbed on appeal unless that ruling reflects manifest unreasonableness, or partiality, prejudice, bias, or ill-will, or such lack of support to be clearly … The proof should establish the presence of [the above] factors . . .

Snody, S. v. Ettlinger, R.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Apr 21, 2020

Ettlinger’s payment of a $45,000.00 fine does not qualify as an admission of liability. See id. … Snody alleges that such evidence was relevant to establish that Dr.

Com. v. Jacobs, T.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Dec 2, 2020

Moreover, that Jacobs possessed a firearm inside the Star Social Club can be clearly seen in the Star Social Club security video, not to mention that his defense counsel conceded in her opening statement that Jacobs had … Lastly, his contention that the trial court failed to state adequate reasons on the record for his sentence qualifies as a substantial question for our review. See Commonwealth v. Flowers, 149 A.3d 867, 871 (Pa.

Com. v. Tildon, T.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Nov 7, 2023

“A Kloiber instruction informs the jury that an eyewitness identification should be viewed with caution when either the witness did not have the opportunity to view the defendant clearly, equivocated on the identification … - 13 - J-A01011-23 cannot establish he was prejudiced due to cumulative errors.).

Com. v. Tucker, C.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 8, 2023

Specifically, “[t]he corpus delicti rule places the burden on the prosecution to establish that a crime has actually occurred before a confession or admission of the accused connecting him to the crime can be admitted. … Counsel then qualified this statement explaining that they do not have walls like a prison, “[b]ut they do have locked doors and it serves the same purpose.” (Id.)

In the Interest of: J.G.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Dec 6, 2022

In its Rule 1925(a) opinion, however, the trial court stated, The record clearly established that DHS provided clear and convincing evidence for terminating Mother’s parental rights and that termination … [E]ven where the evidence clearly establishes a parent [] failed to perform affirmative parental duties for a period in excess of six months, the [trial] court must examine the individual circumstances and

Com. v. Walker, D.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Nov 30, 2023

Rather, as indicated above, it clearly demonstrated Appellant’s common plan and scheme. … of every kind, whether or not conducted for profit; (C) making the record was a regular practice of that activity; (D) all these conditions are shown by the testimony of the custodian or another qualified

Com. v. Baker, T.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Aug 1, 2017

Ind. 2010) (holding witness qualified to provide expert opinion about the defendant's approximate location based on cell -site data) (unreported). … Thus, we agree with Appellant that Detective Kreller's testimony was clearly outside the scope permitted by the trial court's pretrial orders.

In the Interest of: J.G.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Dec 6, 2022

In its Rule 1925(a) opinion, however, the trial court stated, The record clearly established that DHS provided clear and convincing evidence for terminating Mother’s parental rights and that termination … [E]ven where the evidence clearly establishes a parent [] failed to perform affirmative parental duties for a period in excess of six months, the [trial] court must examine the individual circumstances and

Centennial Lending Group v. Seckel Capital

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 26, 2017

At trial, the parties may resolve whether the information in that list qualifies as a Centennial trade secret or belongs to Spadaccini. … The mere possibility that the claim might be defeated does not preclude a finding of probable success if the evidence clearly satisfies the essential prerequisites of the cause of action.

In the Int of: N.B., Appeal of: T.W.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Feb 26, 2025

established. … established.

Com. v. Brown, O.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Jun 16, 2017

From the evidence presented at trial, we simply cannot conclude that the Commonwealth established this element beyond a reasonable doubt. … Casting Officer Ribec as a hero in this case - where the officer merely conducted a traffic stop of a completely compliant individual - was clearly an overstatement; but, to add the suggestion that Appellant would have

Com. v. Coleman, K.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Nov 19, 2020

Specific intent and malice may be established through circumstantial evidence, such as the use of a deadly weapon on a vital part of the victim’s body. Id. at 840. … These circumstances clearly indicate an unexpected and shocking occurrence to the people inside that house.

Com. v. Soto, R.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Apr 13, 2017

George was qualified as an expert. (N.T. 197) 20 Dr. George testified that any such physical findings on children is very unusual. … Although the Appellant denied the allegations against him, the Commonwealth presented evidence that, if believed, established a finding of guilt on the above-mentioned crimes.

K.D. v. E.D.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Aug 23, 2018

This standard can be met where the evidence clearly shows that even supervised visitation would severely Page 9 of 15 a  endanger the child. … The evidence established that Path�11.Qj£Q!