Case law

Sehrawat, B. v. Rite Aid

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Nov 13, 2020

“[I]n order to qualify as a bona fide purchaser, the subsequent buyer must be without notice of the prior equitable interests of others…. … Based on the facts of record, Rite Aid clearly failed to adduce sufficient evidence regarding the existence of a power of attorney. Thus, Rattan Trust was entitled to judgment as a matter of law. See Young v.

Com. v. Sokolowski, R.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Jul 20, 2023

. … [M]ere errors in judgment do not amount to abuse of discretion; instead, we look for manifest unreasonableness, or partiality, prejudice, bias, or ill-will, or such lack of support so as to be clearly … It is established law that failure to move to withdraw a guilty plea in the trial court results in waiver of a challenge to the voluntary nature of the plea on appeal. See Commonwealth v.

Hartley, D. and Hartley, S. v. Hynes, S.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 19, 2018

Appellants then argue that the record establishes that the Hartleys impaired MSI’s collateral. Id. at 28-29. … See 13 Pa.C.S. § 3605. 18 Without a statutory basis to void their waiver, we need not address Appellants’ argument that the record established the Hartleys impaired MSI’s collateral.

In Re: Adoption of T.J.W.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Apr 16, 2018

OCY sought for Mother to attain housing stability, secure the Children’s attendance at school and update and maintain the Children’s medical care, including immunizations, well-checks, and dental care. … In finding that the Children’s emotional needs and welfare favor termination pursuant to Section 2511(b), the trial court reasoned as follows: In this case the testimony clearly established that although

Com. v. Morales-Castro, A.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Feb 17, 2015

structured in the same manner as the statutes that were at issue in Newman and Valentine—and, as was true with the statutes at issue in Newman and Valentine, one particular subsection of 18 Pa.C.S.A. § 7508 is clearly … We recognize that our trial judges are honorable, fair and competent, and although we employ an abuse of discretion standard, we do so recognizing that the judge himself is best qualified to gauge

Morley, J. v. Collazzo, S.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Jul 14, 2016

appeared without [s]ubpoena in the underlying [PFA] Court, in an ex parte hearing, wherein hearsay was considered and no criminal proceeding against [Appellant] was pending, entitled to Judicial or Witness Immunity … 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 matter of law.

Com. v. Shevlin, P.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · May 9, 2024

The record establishes that the filing was docketed on April 3. … Fairly read, within the July 11, 2022 filing, Appellant raised a claim that his plea/direct appeal counsel was ineffective, a claim which is clearly cognizable under the PCRA.

Com. v. Yates, M.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 6, 2017

Additionally, “It is well-settled that specific intent to kill can be established through circumstantial evidence such as the use of a deadly weapon on a vital part of the victim's body.” Commonwealth v. … Trial courts possess great discretion in phrasing jury instructions so long as the law is clearly, adequately, and accurately presented to the jury.

Hartley, D. and Hartley, D. v. Hynes, S.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 19, 2018

Appellants then argue that the record establishes that the Hartleys impaired MSI’s collateral. Id. at 28-29. … See 13 Pa.C.S. § 3605. 18 Without a statutory basis to void their waiver, we need not address Appellants’ argument that the record established the Hartleys impaired MSI’s collateral.

In the Interest of: M.G., a Minor

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Jan 6, 2017

Filer was qualified as an expert with regard to fertility and related endocrinology. (N.T. 04/20/2016 at page 38) 44. Dr. … Clearly, M.G. had motives to protect the Appellant. Each of these nuances are individually indicia of a potential absence of candor on M.G.'

Tyler, C. v. Hoover, R.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 24, 2023

As Primavera established, if an expert has made faulty assumptions or leaps of judgment in relying on certain sources or in forming conclusions based on those sources, he should be cross examined about his … reasonably and regularly rely on this type of information merely to practice their profession lends strong indicia of reliability to source material when it is presented through a qualified

Com. v. Williams, D.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Apr 26, 2016

In addition, we note that the facts and circumstances established by the Commonwealth need not preclude every possibility of innocence. … assistance of counsel in the preparation of the appeal; ( c) if indigent, the right to appeal in forma pauperis and to proceed with assigned counsel as provided in Pennsylvania Rule of Criminal Procedure 122; and ( d) the qualified

In the Int. of: K.A.W., a Minor

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Aug 11, 2022

The record clearly belies Mother’s claim. … Thus, this prong has clearly been met.

Com. v. Levengood, S.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Apr 28, 2022

To qualify for relief under the PCRA, a petitioner must establish, by a preponderance of the evidence, that his conviction or sentence resulted from one or more of the enumerated errors in 42 Pa.C.S. § 9543(a) … Taken together, there is clearly a reasonable basis for making the decision to not call Mrs. Levengood to testify and therefore did not arise to the level required to establish ineffective assistance of counsel. 4.

Reiter, R. v. Hendricks, R.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Nov 13, 2020

This is significant because the most desirable prospective tenant groups typically secure their following-year accommodations promptly, leaving only less-qualified groups in November and thereafter. … Reiter proffers no authority to establish that an AVC, rather than a court order or judgment, may establish a prima facie UTPCPL claim in a private action.

Com. v. Jackson, T.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Jan 19, 2022

Clearly, this line of questioning [on cross- examination] was relevant to explain why the witness waited for close to a week after the robbery to identify Appellant. … The…aforesaid jury instruction accurately and clearly presented the law to the jury and was sufficient to guide the jury in its deliberations.

Com. v. King, M.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Nov 8, 2019

There was also a quantity of marijuana in the truck bed. … … Clearly, the black mask is a red herring with no connection to this case. Id. at 81-83. … The applicant must then establish a prima facie case demonstrating that: (a) the identity of the perpetrator in the case was at issue, and (b) DNA testing of the evidence, “assuming exculpatory results, would establish

C.D. v. T.M.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Jul 26, 2019

It is well-established that a trial court is not required to accept the conclusions of an expert witness. Nomland v. Nomland, 813 A.2d 850, 854 (Pa.Super. 2002). … Mother clearly testified that her paramour does not reside in her house with herself and the Children. N.T., 10/1/18, at 315.

Com. v. Simmons, A.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Jun 11, 2015

At the conclusion of Defendant's qualifying evidence, Mr. Bauer moved for the admission of Defendant's previously executed written Guilty Plea Colloquy. [N.T. 3/8/12, at 39]. … While he may have been confused and scared at some point prior to his plea, the record clearly demonstrates that at the time of his plea hearing Mr.

Com. v. Heyward, D.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Jul 22, 2016

Clearly, the evidence was sufficient to justify the verdict. … The evidence does not establish voluntary manslaughter.