Case law

Anundson Construction & Building Supply Co. v. Emporium Area Joint School Authority

191 Pa. Super. 390 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Dec 17, 1959

Opinion by Watkins, J., The history and facts in this case are the same as contained in the case of Emporium Area Joint School Authority v. … The above case is an appeal from the decree of the court below modifying the award of the arbitration board.

Commonwealth v. Abbas

2004 Pa. Super. 416 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 29, 2004

See Commonwealth v. Brown, 700 A.2d 1310 (Pa.Super.1997). On June 28, 2004, the United States Supreme Court decided U.S. v. Patane, - U.S. -, 124 S.Ct. 2620 , 159 L.Ed.2d 667 (2004). … See Commonwealth v. Brown, 700 A.2d 1310 (Pa.Super.1997) (citing Wong Sun v. United States, 371 U.S. 471 , 83 S.Ct. 407 , 9 L.Ed.2d 441 (1963)).

Shearer's License

26 Pa. Super. 34 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Jul 28, 1904

evidence given on the hearing or its own knowledge it determined that the applicant was not a fit person, or that his house was not necessary for the accommodatión of the public: Kelminski’s License, 164 Pa. 231 ; Commonwealth v. … Superior Ct. 566 , and cases there cited; Brown’s License, 18 Pa. Superior Ct. *36 409 ; Chambers’s License, 18 Pa. Superior Ct. 412 .

Commonwealth v. Rosenfelt

443 Pa. Super. 616 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Jul 11, 1995

While driving, Barringer noticed inside the car, in plain view, the following: a fifty-dollar bill, two four-inch spoons with white powder residue on them, a syringe, and a box of confectioner’s sugar wrapped in a brown paper … Texas v. Brown, 460 U.S. 730, 742 , 103 S.Ct. 1535, 1543 , 75 L.Ed.2d 502, 514 (1983); e.g., Commonwealth v.

Commonwealth v. Leaman

255 Pa. Super. 481 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Apr 13, 1978

Commonwealth v. Brown, supra, 248 Pa.Super. at 294 n. 5, 375 A.2d *497 at 104-05 n. 5. … Commonwealth v. Schroth, supra, and Commonwealth v. Brown, supra, may be read to mandate such a procedure.

Hopkins v. Union Canvas Goods Co.

104 Pa. Super. 264 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 7, 1931

dividend is reviewable by the court, “but it will be set aside only in case of bad faith or when arbitrary, or manifestly erroneous, or such as to constitute an abuse of discretion or disregard of official duty”: Pardee v. … Before doing so, he attended a meeting of the board on September 22, 1927, and offered a resolution demanding a dividend of 200% be declared and paid. This was refused.

Commonwealth v. Chambers

2011 Pa. Super. 276 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Dec 23, 2011

In Smith v. Pennsylvania Board Of Probation and Parole, 546 Pa. 115 , 683 A.2d 278 (1996), the pro se, incarcerated appellant sought to appeal a decision of the Pennsylvania Board of Probation and Parole (“the Board”). … The Board’s decision was filed on March 15, 1994.

Commonwealth Ex Rel. Kunkle v. Claudy

171 Pa. Super. 557 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 1, 1952

In Toliver v. State Board of Parole, 157 Pa. … Lerner v. Smith, 151 Pa. Superior Ct. 265 , 30 A. 2d 347 ; Toliver v. State Board of Parole, 157 Pa. Superior Ct. 218 , 42 A. 2d 285 ; Com. ex rel. McDevitt v. Burke, 166 Pa.

Max Wool v. Keller B. L. Assn.

106 Pa. Super. 492 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Sep 30, 1932

The cases on which appellant’s counsel relies have been modified by the recent decisions of the Supreme Court in Brown v. Victor B. Assn., 302 Pa. 254 , 153 Atl. 349 , and Stone v. Schiller B. & L. … Assn., 302 Pa. 544 , 153 Atl. 758 , which were followed by this court in Weil v. Steiner B. & L. Assn., 100 Pa. Superior Ct. 550 , and Stern v. Ashbourne B. & L. Assn., 100 Pa. Superior Ct. 561 .

Sims v. Sims

188 Pa. Super. 439 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 18, 1959

Rankin v. Rankin, 181 Pa. Superior Ct. 414, 418 , 124 A. 2d 639 ; Barnes v. Barnes, 181 Pa. Superior Ct. 427, 437 , 124 A. 2d 646 ; Boyer v. Boyer, supra, 183 Pa. Superior Ct. 260, 263 , 130 A. 2d 265 . … As we have said, the proof required in an action for divorce from bed and board must be as clearly established as in an action for absolute divorce. Jones v. Jones, supra, 144 Pa. Superior Ct. 372, 378 , 19 A. 2d 480 .

Commonwealth v. Newsome

170 A.3d 1151 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Sep 7, 2017

Commonwealth v. Brown, 996 A.2d 473, 477 (Pa. 2010). An appellate court must give weight “to the specific, reasonable -5- J. … A10031/17 seizure, see, e.g., Commonwealth v.

Commonwealth v. Stofchek

118 Pa. Super. 412 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Apr 22, 1935

White v. Miller, 313 Pa. 140 , 169 A. 436 ; Mallinger v. Pgh., 316 Pa. 257 , 175 A. 525 . … The learned court below relied largely on Guppy v. Moltrup, 281 Pa. 343 , 126 A. 766 , and Com. v. Barbono, 56 Pa. Superior Ct. 637 .

Moyer v. Branch Storage Co., Inc.

138 Pa. Super. 71 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 16, 1939

Hausman would be sufficient to support causal connection if there were no other evidence in the case (Vorbnoff v. Mesta Machine Co., 286 Pa. 199, 206 , 133 A. 256 ; Monis v. Lytle Coal Co., 134 Pa. … Sheldon Axle & Spring Co., 270 Pa. 476, 479 , 113 A. 666 ; McCrosson v. P. R. T.

Hammer v. City of Philadelphia

104 Pa. Super. 119 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 9, 1931

Stepped on the edge — you mean, on the board? A. Yes. Q. You cannot call that a fall into a hole. You mean, you got your foot on the edge of the board? A. Turned my ankle, slid on the edge. Q. On the edge of the board? … In Reed v.

Dennis v. Jarka Corp.

182 Pa. Super. 498 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Dec 28, 1956

Adamchick v. Wyoming Valley Collieries Co., 332 Pa. 401, 410 , 3 A. 2d 377 (1938). In Harring v. … An award was made to the widow by the referee and the board, and was affirmed by the lower court.

Commonwealth v. Auchmuty

2002 Pa. Super. 157 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · May 16, 2002

Brown, stopped along the roadway to inspect Appellant’s rural property after learning that it was for sale. … See Commonwealth v.

Swingle v. Mill Creek Coal Co.

116 Pa. Super. 97 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Dec 12, 1934

This evidence is competent and sustains the referee’s basic finding of fact: Dopkin v. Philadelphia & Reading C. & I. Company, 296 Pa. 71 ; see also Honis v. Coxe Bros. & Company, Inc., 95 Pa. Superior Ct. 209, 211 .” … £I think’ is equivalent to saying £I believe’: Jones v. P. & R. C. & I. Co., 285 Pa. 317, 319 .

Pisano v. Extendicare Homes, Inc.

2013 Pa. Super. 232 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Aug 12, 2013

Darr Construction Co. v. Workmen’s Compensation Appeal Board (Walker), 552 Pa.400, 715 A.2d 1075, 1079-1080 (1998); see also Urmann v. Rockwood Casualty Insurance Co., 905 A.2d 513, 522 (Pa.Super.2006) (same). … Marmet Health Care Center, Inc. v. Brown, - U.S. -, 132 S.Ct. 1201, 1203-1204 , 182 L.Ed.2d 42 (2012). Such a prohibition is not at issue here.

Jamison v. Johnson

2000 Pa. Super. 304 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 16, 2000

Bostick v. Schall’s Brakes and Repairs, Inc., 725 A.2d 1232, 1235 (Pa.Super.1999); Pa.R.C.P. 218(c), note. … See Dublin Sportswear v. Charlett, 485 Pa. 633, 638 , 403 A.2d 568, 570 (1979). ¶ 15 In this case, the Jamisons and their counsel failed to appear for an arbitration hearing that was scheduled for December 30, 1999.

Pikutas v. Glen Alden Coal Co.

129 Pa. Super. 57 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Sep 29, 1937

For instance, the following is taken from Furman v. Standard Pressed Steel Co. et al., 111 Pa. … Zimmer v. Closky et al., supra, is another case cited below, but it is not applicable here.