Case law

Estate of Schermer, E., Appeal of: Schermer, M.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 2, 2017

Rosenwasser reported that Evelyn appeared lucid and did not display short-term memory loss during their conferences, but qualified his testimony by stating that their interactions totaled “four or five hours not in a block … Bernstein’s clearly articulated that these opinions were based upon his review of her medical records. He thereafter discussed the informed consent protocols. See N.T. Hearing, 5/8/15, at 900, et seq.

In The Int. of: Z.S v. Appeal of: D.S.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Dec 18, 2018

made or continue to be made, whether the county agency has filed or sought to join a petition to terminate parental rights and to identify, recruit, process and approve a qualified … [Mother] is able to acknowledge her role in [Child]’s trauma history, we’re sitting here today, that still hasn’t been established

York Development v. Atlantic Wireless

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 2, 2017

Atlantic asserts that this action clearly demonstrates York’s intent to hold the property adversely to Atlantic. Id. at 16. … The “reasonably” qualifier is important: there is no ambiguity if one of the two proffered meanings is unreasonable. See Murphy v. Duquesne Univ.

Carey, S. v. Thompson, R.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · May 20, 2022

That limitation on gun rights is clearly within the bounds of restrictions that the Second Amendment contemplates. Boyd, 999 F.3d at 189. … In PFA matters, a petitioner is required only to establish that abuse occurred by a preponderance of the evidence rather than under the beyond a reasonable doubt standard applicable to criminal matters. E.K. v.

Lefever, C. v. Horsepower Enters., LLC

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Dec 2, 2025

Dale Cherry was qualified as an expert witness for Lefever regarding custom car finishing and "drivability" with aparticular expertise in electronic fuel delivery. ( N.T. p. 94). 63. Mr. … Hence, without evidence to establish the market value for the car as promised, Plaintiff cannot meet his burden of proof.

Com. v. Lee, D.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Jul 17, 2018

Det Cody's testimony established the chain.of custody for the buccal swabs, aswe,U. NT. 12/5/16 at 129- 138*. 'On cross-examination Det. … CAC interview, and trial because She was upset that the defendant did not want to engage in: &sexual relationship with her was clearly rejected by the jury.

Com. v. Bozic, S.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Aug 29, 2016

Furthermore, because trial counsel cannot be deemed ineffective, appellate counsel is also immune from such a claim. See, Lopez, supra. … Clearly, after a full review of the record, counsel's overall performance does not meet the deficient performance standard, as counsel defended Petitioner vigorously and raised relevant and proper objections

Com. v. Hughes, C.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Jan 25, 2016

offense 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 … Rather, “the role of the trial judge is to determine that ‘notwithstanding all the facts, certain facts are so clearly of greater weight that to ignore them or to give them equal weight with all the facts

In the Int. of: S.L.J., Appeal of: S.J.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Nov 12, 2025

Though we are not bound by the [juvenile] court’s inferences and deductions, we may reject its conclusions only if they involve errors of law or are clearly unreasonable in light of the [juvenile] court’s … Only if the court determines that the petitioner established grounds for termination under Subsection 2511(a) does ____________________________________________ 3 We note Father did not file a brief with privately retained

Com. v. Henderson, S.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · May 16, 2022

Case law has also established that certain facts taken alone do not establish reasonable suspicion. … Obviously, the firearm would qualify as evidence under Article 1, § 8 of the Pennsylvania Constitution, and would be considered fruits of a seizure.

Com. v. Johnson, K.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Jan 9, 2018

The discovery order here is clearly separable from the issue of whether Appellee is entitled to a new trial under the PCRA. Further, in a case with a similar fact pattern, Commonwealth v. Frey, 41 A.3d 605, 609 (Pa. … Even if this evidence only sufficed to establish an imperfect self- defense, it was material to petitioner's charge of murder in the first degree.

Com. v. Hollins, E.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Jul 1, 2019

“Our key inquiry is whether the instruction on a particular issue adequately, accurately and clearly presents the law to the jury, and is sufficient to guide the jury in its deliberations.” Commonwealth v. … Defendant has the qualified right to bail under Rule 521 (B). .!itI .I q 11 RY THP f'OI TRT· :l: Ht' :!

F.E.S. v. A.L.S., III

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Apr 5, 2019

The first of these does not qualify as an exception, as it does not dispute any part of the Master’s Report and Recommendation. … Clearly, Father does not seek review of his timely-filed exceptions. Rather, Father presents argument related to the untimely exceptions filed by counsel four days after the deadline imposed by the Rule.

Belogolovsky, E. v. Gitter, L.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Feb 21, 2024

This would include, clearly, any change in custody. See L.J.G. v. E.B., 1261 MDA 2022, supra. … honorable, fair[,] and - 12 - J-A23010-23 competent, and although we employ an abuse of discretion standard, we do so recognizing that the judge [her]self is best qualified

Com. v. Vanderwende, R.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Sep 13, 2016

In making such a statement, Appellant admitted that the time qualified as “excusable delay” for purposes of Rule 600.5 It is clear that adding 64 days to the adjusted run date results ____________ … Under such facts, it is difficult to perceive an abuse of discretion when the trial court selected a remedy clearly enumerated in Pa.R.Crim.P. 573(E).

In the Int. of: J.S. Appeal of: K.W.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 6, 2017

It has been well-established that “[w]hen briefing[,] … it is an appellant’s duty to present arguments that are sufficiently developed for our review. … The record clearly reflects that the conditions which initially led to the removal of Child from his Mother’s care continue to exist and that termination of Mother’s parental rights would serve the needs and welfare of

Com. v. Land, R.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Jun 24, 2024

Taken in conjunction with the MVR presented by the Commonwealth, we are certain that the Appellant's vehicle was legally stopped and the record clearly supports the factual findings of the suppression court. … When a sentence lies within the statutory guidelines, excessiveness only qualifies as a substantial question when the sentence imposed is "so manifestly excessive as to constitute too severe a punishment."

Com. v. Van-Arsdale, B.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Jan 17, 2018

Prior sentencinJ. to the Defendant was referred to the Pennsylvania State Board of Sexual Offenders to 6etermine whether or not he qualified. as a violent sexual predator. … In addition, in order to clearly identify which claims of ineffectivenkss Defendant was raising against which counsel, Defendant was granted until Novejber 14, 2016 to file an amended second P.C.R.A. petition.

In The Int. of: A.J.W., Appeal of: A.W.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Dec 18, 2018

During the examination to qualify Dr. Gentry, the trial court determined that the doctor did not have the expertise to testify as to his parental capacity evaluation. … At the immunization hearing, Judge Younge acted with contempt toward the parents’ attorneys, and allowed her law clerk to preside over the remainder of the hearing.

In the Interest of: N.C., a minor, Appeal of: J.B.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Feb 9, 2017

At the February 12 hearing, this Court qualified Dr. Castel as an expert in pediatric medicine. N.C. presented to Dr. Castel at Nason Hospital with a number of injuries that Dr. … The testimony of both physicians clearly established that N.C. suffered some form of child abuse resulting in injury, which raises a presumption that N.C. 's parents, J.C. and J.B.. abused N.C.