Case law

Commonwealth v. Viera

442 Pa. Super. 348 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Jun 1, 1995

See Commonwealth v. … Commonwealth v.

Altoona Sanitary Milk Co. v. Armstrong

38 Pa. Super. 350 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Feb 26, 1909

Superior Ct. 144 ; Jeannette Bottle Works v. Schall, 13 Pa. Superior Ct. 96 ; Edinboro Academy v. Robinson, 37 Pa. 210 ; Shober’s Administrators v. Lancaster County Park Association, 68 Pa. 429 . … Railroad Company, 31 Pa. 489 ; Philadelphia & Delaware County Railroad Company v. Conway, 177 Pa. 364 . The judgment is affirmed

Ellis Liquor License Case

205 Pa. Super. 454 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Jun 17, 1965

In case of failure of the board to do so, the duty herein imposed upon the board may be enforced by mandamus. … See Garrett v. McHenry, 408 Pa. 451 , 170 A. 2d 363 .

Commonwealth v. Cohen

142 Pa. Super. 199 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Apr 8, 1940

Com. v. Simpson, 310 Pa. 380 , 165 A. 498 ; Com. v. Kolsky, 100 Pa. Superior Ct. 596 . … Com. v. Dailey, 75 Pa. Superior Ct. 510 . Judgment affirmed.

Mihalik v. Lattimer Coal Corp.

162 Pa. Super. 450 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 1, 1948

The referee, affirmed by the board, found that the claimant was totally disabled as the result ofanthraco-silicosis (miner’s asthma), contracted in the course of. his employment with the defendant employer, and made an award … In an attempt to bring itself within our ruling in Bingaman v. Baldwin Locomotive Works, Inc., 159 Pa.

Lee v. Lee

185 Pa. Super. 252 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Jan 21, 1958

The plaintiff boarded at a home in Norris- *254 town, Montgomery County, Pennsylvania. The defendant lived with her mother in Norristown. … He went to his boarding house. From that time until the present they have never lived together. It is the plaintiff’s contention that the period of desertion commenced on February 15, 1938.

Com. v. Kelley, A.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Jan 24, 2023

Commonwealth v. Brown, 52 A.3d 320, 325 (Pa.Super. 2012); Pa.R.Evid. 404(b). The evidence, however, may be admissible for another, proper purpose. Brown, 52 A.3d at 325. … Commonwealth v. Watson, 945 A.2d 174, 176 (Pa.Super. 2008) (quoting Commonwealth v. Brown, 596 A.2d 840, 842 (Pa.Super. 1991)).

Moody v. Susquehanna Collieries Co.

107 Pa. Super. 134 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 26, 1932

The board and the referee have the exclusive function of determining the facts. … Johnson v. Baldwin Loco. Wks., 98 Pa. Superior Ct. 28 ; Adams v. Colonial Colliery Co., 104 Pa. Superior Ct. 187 .

McCrossin, J. v. Comcast Spectacor

311 A.3d 1115 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Feb 6, 2024

Marmet Health Care Center, Inc. v. Brown, 565 U.S. 530, 532-33 (2012); Moses H. Cone Memorial Hospital v. Mercury Construction Corp., 460 U.S. 1, 24 (1983); Estate of Atkinson, 231 A.3d at 898; Saltzman v. … Darr Construction Co. v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal Board, 715 A.2d 1075, 1079–1080 (Pa. 1998); Pisano v. Extendicare Homes, Inc., 77 A.3d 651, 659 (Pa. Super. 2013).

Richards v. Fraim Lock Co.

158 Pa. Super. 414 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Dec 13, 1945

His findings of fact and conclusions were affirmed by the board and its actions were sustained by the learned court below. … If this proposition now advanced had been raised in the court below, we would not be warranted in disturbing the findings of the referee approved by the board. Cf. Vince v. Allegheny Pittsburgh Coal Co., 153 Pa.

Walker v. Erie

64 Pa. Super. 525 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 9, 1916

It is a toll or duty for the pitching or lodging of goods upon a wharf, or pay for taking goods into a boat and from thence: Kusenberg v. Browne, 42 Pa. 173, 179 . The parties intended to make a legal contract. … The city had the right and duty to regulate the use of the wharf: Penny Pot Landing v. Philadelphia, 16 Pa. 79 .

Commonwealth v. Young

245 Pa. Super. 298 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Nov 22, 1976

See Commonwealth v. Brown, 242 Pa.Super. 240 , 363 A.2d 1249 (1976). The plea colloquy in the instant case, however, contains only two references to sentencing. “Mr. … Commonwealth v. Fiero, 462 Pa. 409, 412 , 341 A.2d 448, 449 (1975).

Commonwealth v. Benjamin

260 Pa. Super. 1 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Nov 1, 1978

Rather, in Commonwealth v. … Commonwealth v.

Lederman v. Lazarus

80 Pa. Super. 602 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Apr 16, 1923

It may *606 be that if objection had been made to the admission of the evidence on this ground that it should have been rejected, but no objection was made and no request was made to withdraw it or strike it out: Brown v. … Gilmore, 92 Pa. 47 ; Clark v. Millett, 57 Pa. Superior Ct. 287 . If this had been done, an amendment of the declaration making the evidence clearly admissible could have been made.

Home Financers' Building & Loan Ass'n v. Michael

117 Pa. Super. 391 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 25, 1934

Michael, they went to live with their daughter, Helen V. Fitzpatrick, for an agreed board of $10 a week each. No payments were ever made on this obligation as Michael continued unemployed and Mrs. … Fitzpatrick for board and lodging aggregated $4,240. “13.

Rothrock Stores v. Panzera

72 Pa. Super. 349 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Jul 17, 1919

Justice Brown, “The defendant was not required in the first instance to show that the bank had knowledge of the false representations made by McKee to him, for after he had shown, as he clearly did show, that the fraud had … The learned judge below justified his action by a reference to the case of Dominion Trust Co. v. Hildner, 243 Pa. 253 . In his opinion he says, “The case is within the ruling in Dominion Trust Company v.

MacPherson, P. v. The Magee Memorial Hosp.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Nov 25, 2015

Commonwealth v. Brown, 23 A.3d 544, 556 (Pa. Super. 2011). … See Brown, supra. The Majority next concludes that the arbitration agreement in Wert is different than the one in the instant case.

Congini by Congini v. PORTERSVILLE, ETC.

312 Pa. Super. 461 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Aug 17, 1983

In Klein v. … Even if an amendment to the pleadings were allowed however, and this issue was added, our decision would not change in this type of case involving a non-licensee of the Liquor Board. . See Sinn v.

Rouseville Borough School District v. Cornplanter Township School District

29 Pa. Super. 214 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 9, 1905

The rule laid down in Barnhart v. … In our late case of Cox v. Wilson, 25 Pa.

Shermet v. Embick

90 Pa. Super. 269 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Dec 13, 1926

Insley, 7 Pa. 223 ; DeBolle v. Ins. Co., 4 Wharton 68 ; Strohecker v. Grant, 16 S. & R. 237; Gilpin v. Howell, 5 Pa. 41, p. 50 ; Blymire v. Boistle, 6 Watts 182, 184 ; Meason v. Kaine, 67 Pa. 126 ; Spencer v. … A suit in the name of Fenkel, however, is sufficient: Hamilton v. Brown, 18 Pa. 87 ; C. H. Hardy Auto Co. v. Posey, 50 Pa. Superior Ct. 399 .