Case law

R.L.T. v. L.A.T.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 18, 2015

During the ensuing evidentiary hearing, Father testified on his own behalf and presented Scott Tracy, PhD, who was qualified as an expert in the field of child counseling. … (5) Whether there is an established pattern of conduct of either party to promote or thwart the relationship of the child and the other party.

Com. v. Keller, C.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Apr 8, 2019

The record clearly establishes this lack of strategy by Mr. Hughes, i.e., his introduction of details of the prior OCY/CYS investigations that were not elicited by the Commonwealth; of A.K.' … All of this prejudicial information was raised on behalf of the defense, raised by defense counsel, which clearly was prejudicial to his client.

Com. v. Duboise, R.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Feb 6, 2018

We find that Hall’s statement to Starks was made at a time when she believed that Duboise was trying to seriously hurt her and, thus, that it qualifies as an “excited utterance” hearsay exception under Rule 803(2). … Moreover, the probative value of the evidence clearly outweighed its potential for unfair prejudice where the Commonwealth's case was otherwise based largely on circumstantial evidence.

Com. v. Byrd, J.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Apr 17, 2026

Rather, the appellant must establish, by reference to the record, that the [trial] court ignored or misapplied the law, exercised its judgment for reasons of partiality, prejudice, bias[,] or ill[-]will … Clearly he has a history of criminal activity both in and out of the jail that stretches for essentially the majority of his life.

S.P. v. K.H. v. B.H.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · May 16, 2025

Thus, Mother clearly and repeatedly preserved her challenge to Grandfather’s standing. Having concluded Mother preserved her first issue, we turn to the merits of her claim. … Further, the mere fact that the trial court issued rulings adverse to Mother’s position is clearly not evidence of “judicial bias, prejudice or unfairness.” See Ware, 577 A.2d at 904.

Com. v. Endrikat, R.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · May 5, 2015

:17 PM We will now address the merits of the remaining claims. 1) Sufficiency of the Evidence Evidence is sufficient to support the verdict where it establishes … preparation of the appeal; (c) the Defendant has the rights, if indigent, to appeal in forma pauperis and to proceed with assigned counsel as provided in Pa.R.Crim.P. 122; and (d) the Defendant has the qualified

In the Int. of: N.M., Appeal of: J.M.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Aug 12, 2022

Duncan qualified as an expert witness in parents who are drug- addicted giving birth. … If the court finds that the child is not adependent child or that the allegations of delinquency have not been established it shall dismiss the petition and order the child discharged from any detention or other restriction

Com. v. Feese, B.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 13, 2017

could have provided exculpatory testimony, there is nothing of record to indicate why these witnesses could not have been called by the defense, particularly since the transcripts of the Grand Jury were clearly … Thus, “although we employ an abuse of discretion - 17 - J-S58025-17 standard, we do so recognizing that the judge himself is best qualified to gauge his ability to preside impartially

Com. v. A.S.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Jan 9, 2017

Then the court qualified those sentencing considerations by - 31 - J-A26001-16 falsely asserting that Appellant had only self-servingly sought treatment after he was arrested. … In its opinion, the sentencing court asserts its reliance on presumption established in Commonwealth v. Devers, 546 A.2d 12 (Pa. 1988).

In Re: J.F.K., Appeal of E.F., father

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Dec 2, 2016

The burden of proof is on the party seeking termination to establish by clear and convincing evidence the existence of grounds for doing so. … Furthermore, [the decision of J.F.K. and B.R.K.’s foster families] not to adopt does not suddenly qualify Father to raise three children with varied behavioral and disciplinary problems.

Com. v. Williams, B.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 24, 2018

As the trial court explained: Briefly, the evidence presented at trial established that [D.W.], born on October 13, 2015, was the daughter of India Murphy and [Appellant]. … Whether the trial court erred in excluding [Appellant’s] expert witness when the expert was crucial to [Appellant’s] defense and was highly qualified in the field of forensic epidemiology

Com. v. Jackson, H.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · May 1, 2018

Further, regarding his attempted theft conviction, Appellant’s demand for money and other items clearly establishes an attempt to unlawfully take the property of another with intent to deprive him thereof. … ppellant contends that the soda bottle, which he threw at [the victim], cannot be an “instrument of crime” since it was made of harmless plastic.6 Essentially, [the a]ppellant argues that, before an item can qualify

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

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Jan 13, 2017

Therefore, we agree with counsel that a review of the facts and the law establish that this issue is frivolous. … each case and consider all explanations offered by the parent facing termination of his or her parental rights, to determine if the evidence, in light of the totality of the circumstances, clearly

Com. v. Uphold, R.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 13, 2017

Furthermore, this Court recognized that the objections to the matters of discovery and remedies available are clearly within … Defendant has not shown that there is a reasonable possibility that the Confidential informant could bring forth evidence exonerating the Defendant, as required by established

Jordan, R. v. Jordan, R.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · May 11, 2021

(9) The standard of living of the parties established during the marriage. … (8) The standard of living of the parties established during the marriage.

Com. v. Neal, A.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Sep 11, 2017

VVfJ think we've established that there is a third person. … That exception is clearly not applicable to this case. See Commonwealth v. Al/burn, 721 A.2d 363, 367 (Pa. Super. 1998).'

Smith, S. v. Smith, C.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Sep 7, 2017

In his motion, Husband claimed Judge Charles allowed Wife’s attorney “to knowingly make false statements about [Husband,] . . . and is clearly biased against [Husband] in his rulings and actions by allowing this misconduct … That establishes a sequence of events.

Emmanouilidou, P. v. Kyziridis, I.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Apr 17, 2024

Father did not offer the counselor as an expert witness, and Father advised the trial court that she was not qualified to opine as to Children’s best interests. … It is well-established that “[i]ssues not raised in the trial court are waived and cannot be raised for the first time on appeal.” Pa.R.A.P. 302(a).

Estate of: Hollis C. Gordon, Sr.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Nov 15, 2017

that Petitioners lacked standing since, under the 2009 Will, which could be probated if the 2014 Will was invalidated, petitioners were effectively disinherited by the nominal bequest of $5.00 each, and therefore do not qualify … Furthermore, the Fifth Petition, filed 17 days after the expiration of the one year period, did not include any additional allegations that would have established Petitioners' standing to challenge the probate of the 2014

Adoption of: L.S.P., Appeal of: Westmoreland CCB

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 15, 2019

Johns was qualified as an expert in parent-child relationships. … As this was clearly a clerical error, we do not find it to be a basis for vacating the order of the trial court.