Case law

Misinkaitis Unempl. Comp. Case

169 Pa. Super. 124 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Jul 19, 1951

Glen Alden Coal Co. v. Unemployment Compensation Board of Review. Superior Court of Pennsylvania. Argued March 6, 1951. July 19, 1951. *125 Before RHODES, P.J., HIRT, RENO, DITHRICH, ROSS, ARNOLD and GUNTHER, JJ. … Barclay White Co. v.

McAllister Unemployment Compensation Case

197 Pa. Super. 552 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Apr 12, 1962

Progress Manufacturing Company, Inc. v. Unemployment Compensation Board of Review, 406 Pa. 163 , 176 A. 2d 632 (1962). … On appeal, after hearing testimony, the referee and the Unemployment Compensation Board of Revietv affirmed the decision of the Bureau. There is nothing before us except the appeal from the decision of the Board.

Delucca's Liquor License Case

124 Pa. Super. 500 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 21, 1936

In Com. v. … The. essentials of a “proper hearing” were considered in Com. v. MeMenamin, supra.

Royal Liquor License Case

190 Pa. Super. 643 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Nov 11, 1959

Before the lower court this appellant sought a reversal of the board on the question of administrative discretion under §464 of the Liquor Code of April 12, 1951, P. … The equity action in Benner v.

SHIRLEY BY SHIRLEY v. Javan

454 Pa. Super. 131 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Nov 12, 1996

Thereafter, the mother applied for public assistance at the Cumberland County Board of Assistance and filed a second support action against Coulson. … Oman v. Oman, 333 Pa.Super. 356, 359 , 482 A.2d 606, 608 (1984), quoting Brown v. Hall, 495 Pa. 635 , 643 n. 11, 435 A.2d 859 , 863 n. 11 (1981); Mallinger v. Mallinger, 197 Pa.Super. 34 , 175 A.2d 890 (1961).

Evans v. Hazle Brook Coal Co.

134 Pa. Super. 462 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Dec 15, 1938

The referee awarded compensation, and the award was affirmed by the board. The court of common pleas, on appeal by defendant, affirmed the board and entered judgment for the amount of the award. … The connection was established by competent evidence (Witt v. Witt’s Food Market et al., 122 Pa. Superior Ct. 557, 564 , 186 A. 275 ). Lacey v. Washburn & Williams Co., supra, and Micale v.

Commonwealth v. Huston

46 Pa. Super. 172 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 3, 1911

State, 87 Ga. 549 ; Walker v. State, 13 Tex. Ct. App. 618 ; Grant v. State, 33 Fla. 291 ; State v. Arrington, 7 N. Car. 571; State v. Bishop, 73 N. Car. 44; State v. Whitaker, 89 N. Car. 472; State v. Godwin, 138 N. … Car. 582; Blair v. Commonwealth, 93 Ky. 493 ; State v. Davis, 31 W. Va. 390 ; People v. Jenkins, 56 Cal. 4 ; State v. Clifton, 30 La. Ann. 951 .

Shoener v. County of Schuylkill

107 Pa. Super. 114 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 27, 1932

Whatever is not expressly and distinctly agreed upon and set forth as admitted must be taken not to exist: Loux & Son v. Fox et al., 171 Pa. 68, 71 , 33 A. 190 ; Schuldt v. … Reading Trust Co. et al., 270 Pa. 360, 366 , 113 A. 545 ; Hebron et al. v. Magda, 280 Pa. 508, 510 , 124 A. 674 . Section 7 of the Act approved April 9, 1929, P.

Jenner Township Annexation Case

208 Pa. Super. 62 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Jun 17, 1966

Zoning Board of Adjustment, 393 Pa. 458 , 143 A. 2d 360 , it was said, at page 462: “The Board’s contention is confronted by the further barrier that implied repeals are not favored by the law: Scott v. … In Scott v.

Commonwealth v. Butler

194 A.3d 145 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Aug 1, 2018

Commonwealth v. Brown, 996 A.2d 473, 477 (Pa. 2010) (citations omitted). … Commonwealth v. Brown, 996 A.2d at 479. Butler contends that while Bulicki identified himself to Officer Rosenberg, there was reason to question his reliability. See Butler’s Br. at 14.

Friends' Boarding Home of Bucks Quarterly Meeting v. County Commissioners

80 Pa. Super. 475 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 2, 1923

The institution is maintained as a boarding home. … Church v. Phila., 266 Pa. 405 .

Snead v. Megill

202 Pa. Super. 386 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Dec 12, 1963

Sinclair v. Shaffer Lumber Co., 180 Pa. Superior Ct. 234 , 119 A. 2d 682 (1956). … In Banks v. McClain, 156 Pa. Superior Ct. 512 , 40 A. 2d 905 (1945), the decision was mailed by the board on March 24, 1944; the claimant’s attorney claimed he did not receive it until March 27.

Com. v. Price, D.

2019 Pa. Super. 368 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Dec 31, 2019

See Commonwealth v. Price, 203 A.3d 264, 266-68 (Pa.Super.), vacated, 217 A.3d 193 (Pa. 2019). … See [Commonwealth v.]

Commonwealth v. Cute

249 Pa. Super. 492 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 6, 1977

Commonwealth v. Holmes, supra; Commonwealth v. Dilbeck, supra; Commonwealth v. Sutton, supra; Commonwealth v. Brown, supra. … Commonwealth v. Brown, supra.

Lakott v. Armour & Co.

147 Pa. Super. 597 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 15, 1941

Justice Steen in Parks v. Miller P. Mach. … As this record stands, both courts are bound by the findings of the board. This case clearly falls under the first classification of cases set out in Royko v. Logan Coal Co. et al.., 146 Pa.

Leech v. Builders Supply Co.

102 Pa. Super. 543 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · May 1, 1931

Thereupon, the defendant took an appeal to the compensation board. … Justice Kephart points out in Lente v.

Cooper v. Byllesby Engineering & Management Co.

140 Pa. Super. 158 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Apr 26, 1940

Again *160 the referee set aside the receipt and, on successive appeals, his action was affirmed by the board and a court of common pleas. … We are of the opinion that the evidence was not sufficient to sustain the findings by the referee and board and that the case is ruled by Shuler v. Midvalley Coal Co., 296 Pa. 503 , 146 A. 146 , and Eberst v.

Ogden v. Belfield

82 Pa. Super. 534 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Nov 20, 1923

McCormick, 278 Pa. 268 ; Boyd v. Houghton, 269 Pa. 273 ; Hanley v. Waxman, 80 Pa. Superior Ct. 274 . If the evidence had been objected to on the trial the plaintiff’s statement could easily have been amended: Brown v. … Co, v. N. Y. Cent. R. R., 267 Pa. 64, 77 ; and if amendable in the court below, after a trial on the merits this court will not reverse, but consider it as amended: Shoenberger v. Hackman, 37 Pa. 87 ; Mathias v.

Ingram v. W. J. Rainey, Inc.

127 Pa. Super. 481 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Apr 15, 1937

This agreement was not offered in evidence, nor is there any averment that it was ever approved by the board. … In support of the conclusion reached in the Barlock case it was stated, citing Bausch v.

Balser v. Young

72 Pa. Super. 502 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Jul 17, 1919

In Guilmartin v. … In Henderson v.