Case law

Opinions from 1658 to today.

Filterspasuperct

4,940 results

0.47s

  • Com. v. Harper, D.

    2020 Pa. Super. 77 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 30, 2020

    Appellant emphasizes no foundation was laid for this testimony and Officer Moffatt was not qualified as an expert. … It is undisputed that in this case, Officer Moffatt was not offered or qualified as an expert witness. - 19 - J-S03020-20 manner in which he did.

    Cited 1 timesPublished
  • Penn-Lehigh Corp. Appeal

    191 Pa. Super. 649 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 24, 1960

    The power to determine what *653 property shall be subject to taxation and what property shall be immune is solely within the province of the General Assembly. … The enabling statute authorizing the imposition of the tax, clearly states that the county may assess and tax as real estate “buildings” and “mills and manufactories of all kinds.”

    Cited 13 timesPublished
  • Philadelphia v. Schaller

    148 Pa. Super. 276 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Nov 20, 1941

    For our purpose we need only observe that it is no more than declarative of the existing law as established by Graves v. O'Keefe. … The theory, which once won a qualified approval, that a tax on income is legally or economically a tax on its source is no longer tenable . . . . . . and the only basis for implying a constitutional immunity from state income

    Cited 22 timesPublished
  • Hayward v. Hayward

    2002 Pa. Super. 310 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Sep 25, 2002

    Clearly, pursuant to paragraph six of the consent order, the parties intended only to grant Wife half of the marital portion of Husband’s pension. … Two distinct methods for equitable distribution of pensions have been established in Pennsylvania.

    Cited 19 timesPublished
  • Oluschak Unemployment Compensation Case

    192 Pa. Super. 255 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Apr 13, 1960

    They were clearly within the class of persons which the Legislature intended to dis *261 qualify from benefits. … This claimant could have severed liis employment and brought himself clearly within subsections (1), (2) and (3) of section 402(d), supra, by resigning from Westinghouse and the Westinghouse union, so that clearly he would

    Cited 20 timesPublished
  • Bayview Loan Servicing LLC v. Wicker

    2017 Pa. Super. 149 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · May 17, 2017

    Summary judgment is appropriate only when the record clearly shows that there is no genuine issue of material fact and that the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. … Moreover, the law does not require that a witness qualifying business records even have a personal knowledge of the facts reported in the business record.

    Cited 28 timesPublished
  • Edwards v. Brandywine Hospital

    438 Pa. Super. 673 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Jan 25, 1995

    Hospitals once enjoyed complete tort immunity as charitable institutions. As hospitals evolved into sophisticated corporate entities which expected fees for services, their tort immunity receded. … The regulation’s alternating use of “shall” and “should” clearly show the Health Department’s appreciation of the difference between the mandatory and the aspirational.

    Cited 38 timesPublished
  • Lehman v. Commissioners of Northumberland Co.

    87 Pa. Super. 440 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 27, 1925

    The viewers were duly qualified to perform their duties by a justice of the peace, at Shamokin, and then started in the automobile upon their journey to the site of the bridge. … The proceeding was one at law, as is clearly established by the authorities hereinbefore cited, in the tribunal to which jurisdiction is given by the statute to determine the rights of the litigants.

    Cited 7 timesPublished
  • Marsh's Case

    140 Pa. Super. 472 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 11, 1940

    At the hearing upon the petition, the evidence established the following facts: Eugene Marsh, son of Mr. and Mrs. John Marsh of South Middleton Township, was born October 22, 1929. … We have nothing to do with the wisdom or propriety of such an enactment, but when it is clearly declared, it is the duty of the courts to enforce it.”

    Cited 6 timesPublished
  • Commonwealth v. McCue

    46 Pa. Super. 416 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Apr 17, 1911

    Brennan, it is true, testified that no oath was administered to McCue, but this testimony was flatly contradicted by Nealon, the inspector, and by the jurat which Brennan had signed. *421 The testimony of Brennan clearly … establishes that whatever was done by Kerrigan in his presence, was done with his consent and by his authority.

    Cited 5 timesPublished
  • Commonwealth v. Grear

    168 Pa. Super. 32 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Nov 14, 1950

    A comparison of the genuine signatures with the signature on the voter’s certificate clearly established that the latter was false. … The evidence clearly shows that there was nothing to prevent her leaving, or at least having the matter reported for her by one of her party watchers.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Com. v. Payne, R.

    210 A.3d 299 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Apr 29, 2019

    the outcome of a degree-of-guilt hearing qualifies under these PCRA provisions as a change in the outcome of the trial. … The trial court denied the PCRA petition because “the evidence, including [Appellant’s] statement to Crawford County District Attorney Donald Lewis and his concealment of [the victim’s] body, clearly established [Appellant

    Cited 12 timesPublished
  • Smiley v. Ohio Casualty Insurance

    309 Pa. Super. 247 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Jan 7, 1983

    The court rejected the contention that it was sufficient to establish the daughter’s probable financial contributions to the claimants in future years. … It contends that the claimants have presented claims so clearly without merit that their request for a reasonable attorney’s fee should have been denied on the insurer’s motion for judgment.

    Cited 12 timesPublished
  • Corrado v. Thomas Jefferson University Hospital

    790 A.2d 1022 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Dec 19, 2001

    DeJager’s testimony, Corrado could not establish the causation element of his prima facie case against the Hospital. … Clearly, the trial court did not err in granting the motion in limine dismissing the wrongful death claim.

    Cited 55 timesPublished
  • Commonwealth v. Smouse

    406 Pa. Super. 369 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Jul 10, 1991

    . § 20076] (nothing in Title 42 shall impair or limit the existing rights, powers, functions or immunities of any district attorney, sheriff, register of wills or coroner). … Thus, the evidence clearly negated any inference that the crime committed was the result of a sudden passion.

    Cited 18 timesPublished
  • In the Int. of: A.C., Appeal of: D.C.

    237 A.3d 553 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Aug 19, 2020

    The Legislature has determined that the likelihood clearly established abuse has occurred, other than at the hands of the custodian, is so small that prima facie evidence the custodian has caused the injury … The trial court’s adjudication of dependency was clearly supported by its finding of abuse versus Mother. See Interest of I.R.-R., supra.

    Cited 27 timesPublished
  • Olshan v. Tenet Health System City Avenue, LLC.

    2004 Pa. Super. 128 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Apr 22, 2004

    While background activities, such as hiring the physicians, training the staff, and establishing rules might have occurred in Philadelphia, nothing directly involving patient care took place in Philadelphia. Had Dr. … “Primary health care services” is defined in 35 P.S. § 449.43 as including, but not limited to, regular checkups, immunizations, school physicals, health educations, prenatal and obstetrical care, early periodic screening

    Cited 15 timesPublished
  • Talmadge, S. v. Ervin, F.

    236 A.3d 1154 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Jul 28, 2020

    -2- J-A03023-20 [O]ur standard of review when faced with an appeal from the trial court’s denial of a motion for a new trial is whether the trial court clearly … Thus, this line of inquiry established only that Dr. Zipes did not have the Pill Count Document, or any other part of the police file, when he prepared his expert report.

    Cited 6 timesPublished
  • Com. v. Wallace, J.

    2021 Pa. Super. 4 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Jan 8, 2021

    In addition, we note that the facts and circumstances established by the Commonwealth need not preclude every possibility of innocence. … The Commonwealth’s evidence clearly established that a brawl occurred in which defendant and Williams were participants. This, however, does not in itself demonstrate the existence of a conspiracy.

    Cited 1 timesPublished
  • Stinson v. Stinson

    163 Pa. Super. 497 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 6, 1948

    Without going into detail, the operations were of such a nature as to clearly establish that the respondent’s complaints as to illness were not functional but organic. … That marked the beginning of the decline in health of a comparatively young woman that progressively continued until she had, according to the testimony of a qualified psychiatrist, who among his other qualifications is an

    Cited 9 timesPublished

Ask Donna

Ask Donna

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.