Case law

Plum Hollow Hunting Club & Henry, D v. Fraker, J.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Aug 10, 2016

lines because they did not establish a boundary. … To establish mistake wit must clearly appear by the testimony of witnesses who distinctly remember the facts that a mistake was made and that the writing does not express the agreement.

In the Interest of: P.K.K., Jr., a Minor

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Dec 18, 2017

totality of the circumstances clearly warrants termination. … Further, the finding under 2511 (b) is established clearly and convincingly that it would be in the best interest of 30  these Children to receive

Com. v. Powell, G.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Aug 8, 2023

Wells, 719 A.2d 729, 730 (Pa. 1998) (finding that, an order denying a petition to withdraw as counsel does not qualify as a collateral order, and therefore immediately appealable, because such an order does not pertain to … The trial court clearly stated that the statement was “totally irrelevant and immaterial and has nothing to do with anything involved in this case.” Id. at 3.

Com. v. Britton, S.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 6, 2018

A substantive right is "a right to equal enjoyment of fundamental rights, privileges, and immunities; distinguished from a procecluraLright.d. (citing Black's Law Dictionary 1429 (6th ed. 1990)). … That fact, along with the rest of the averments contained in the search warrant application, establishes probable cause.

Com. v. Girardi, J.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Sep 15, 2016

The board shall establish standards for evaluations and for evaluators conducting the assessments. … The statement was insignificant in the context of a consideration of all of the evidence, and clearly did not deprive [Appellant] of a fair trial. Trial Ct.

Sposato, A. v. Sposato, A.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 10, 2025

Super. 2020) (stating that “simply because a judge rules against a party does not establish bias on the part of the judge against that party”) (citation, quotation marks, and brackets omitted). … The evidence of record clearly demonstrates that this was an accident and Father was not negligent.

Com. v. Coleman, N.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 18, 2016

The next witness to testify at trial on behalf of the Commonwealth was Detective Mark Minzola who was qualified as an expert in the field of cellular telephone records analysis. Id. at 148. … In addition, we note that the facts and circumstances established by the Commonwealth need not preclude every possibility of innocence.

In Re: N.J.A.G-P., a Minor

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Apr 28, 2025

Valazquez testified that, because of his immigration status, Father does not qualify for public assistance. Id. at 172. Ms. … Severing the attachment that he has with Father is clearly necessary for his health and well-being.

Com. v. Parker, J.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 2, 2017

No time limit was ever established. A strict interpretation of the order, as related by Judge Means, indicates Parker absolutely complied. He did, in fact, leave the building. … Accordingly, the encounter between Parker and Attorney Cacciamani does not qualify as contemptuous.

Com. v. Clausell, D.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Sep 1, 2022

The evidence that was presented before me by the credible officer that testified demonstrated quite clearly that the defendant engaged in extraordinarily reckless conduct that comports with the statutes at issue. … Although Appellant did not qualify for RRRI programs and boot camp due to the nature of the original offenses, this Court and the prosecutor waived objections to boot camp ineligibility.

Trust Under Deed of Walter G, Appeal of:Garrison,M

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Sep 27, 2021

Instantly, we note that unlike Smithson, the docket entries at docket nos. 1992-X1518 and 1992-X1509 clearly indicate the date on which notice of the June 16, 2020 order was sent. … Section 706(b)(4) recognizes that a request for removal upon unanimous agreement of the qualified beneficiaries is a factor for the court to consider, but before removing the trustee the court

Maley, J. v. Shell Western Exploration

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Dec 18, 2018

Similarly, a contract could establish a claim for negligent misrepresentation, which requires establishing the following: “(1) a misrepresentation of a material fact; (2) made under circumstances in … The deadline for the expert reports was a certain time and clearly, I mean, asking questions about this, and I object to the additional information.

Com. v. Rothhaar, D.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 27, 2025

In reaching its decision, the - 40 - J-S47041-24 Mayfield Court determined that application of the federal attenuation doctrine in Strieff “clearly conflicts with [its] state exclusionary … rule “would make it virtually impossible to rehabilitate an investigation once misconduct has occurred” and that the “purpose of [its] state exclusionary rule is to protect individual privacy rights, not to permanently immunize

Lisser, M. v. Polis, R.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 7, 2016

THAT ARE CLEARLY FALSE[?] … Ordinarily, "[i]t is well established that the credibility of witnesses is an issue to be determined by the trier of fact.

Com. v. Jordan-Major, T.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Nov 21, 2017

The expert's testimony established only that the victims did not succumb to self-inflicted causes of death." Commonwealth v. … And clearly there's been different versions given, and ultimately you have to reconcile the version. You have to determine the facts. N.T., 11/18/2016 at 132-33.

In the Interest of: Z.G.D., a Minor

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Dec 28, 2016

Williams, who holds a master’s degree in mental health counseling, was qualified as an expert in the area of child therapy and, in particular, Reactive Attachment Disorder (“RAD”). See id. at 57-59. … As the evidence presented at the hearing clearly indicates, [Child] is having a very difficult time coming to terms with her [m]other’s behavior towards her.

Com. v. Barrow, J.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Sep 28, 2020

Thus, Appellant clearly understood the nature of the rights being abandoned. … In addition, we note that the facts and circumstances established by the Commonwealth may not preclude every possibility of innocence.

Com. v. Tyma, T.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Dec 1, 2016

have been able to testify as to how the Defendant examined them - which actually does not have any bearing on whether he touched the victims in the cases - certainly these patients are not medical experts and are not qualified … ineffectiveness, and though some warranted extensive discussion from this 29 56a  Court, some of them were so spurious that they clearly

In Re: L.M., a minor, Appeal of: M.M.D.L.R.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 20, 2017

Accordingly, OCYF established grounds for Father's termination pursuant to [§ 2511(a)(2)]. . . . … With the grounds for termination established, it is evident to this [c]ourt that termination would best meet Child’s needs and welfare.

C.B.J. v. A.L.S.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 29, 2019

She explained: BY THE COURT: Qualify your response. You said yes, somewhat. What do you mean by somewhat? … Clearly, the court considered R.J.’s preference in fashioning the subject order. - 15 - J-A05023-19 C.J., Jr., was ten years old at the time of his in camera interview.