Case law

Daniels, C. v. Atlantic Comm Bank

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Sep 10, 2019

See Romano v. Brown & Williams, 665 A.2d 1139, 1142–43 (N.J. Super. App. Div. 1995). … Co. v.

Commonwealth v. Rahman

2013 Pa. Super. 152 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Jun 24, 2013

J-S18002-13 *502 In Commonwealth v. … See Commonwealth v.

Tresca v. Schupp

91 Pa. Super. 368 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Apr 28, 1927

MO, to have the case certified to the law side of the court (Ebling v. … The change in procedure made by the act of 1907 is stated in Drum v.

Henwood v. Home Indemnity Co.

138 Pa. Super. 430 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Sep 29, 1939

We think the present ease falls within the principle announced in National Bank of Chester County v. … See also Oleon v. Rosenbloom, 55 Pa. Superior Ct. 1 , affirmed 247 Pa. 250 , 93 A. 473 .

Wilson v. Pullman Co.

65 Pa. Super. 499 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 9, 1917

He cites in support of this proposition Bryant v. American Surety Co., 69 Minn. 30 . … It is here worthy of notice that the same court construed that same statute in the case of Brown v.

Richardson v. Savage

129 Pa. Super. 235 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Sep 29, 1937

Nulton, 219 Pa. 253, 256 , 68 A. 707 ; Rader v. Keiper, 285 Pa. 579 , 132 A. 824 ; Morrish v. Price, 293 Pa. 169 , 142 A. 137 ; Jordan v. Jordan, 93 Pa. Superior Ct. 519 ; Estate of Lena Hartzell, 114 Pa. … In Morrish v.

Roberts v. Means

146 Pa. Super. 188 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · May 1, 1941

Superior Ct. 354, 358 , 2 A. 2d 508 ; Titus v. S. E. Sostmann & Co., 133 Pa. Superior Ct. 201 , 2 A. 2d 580 . … As the injury did not occur in the course of her son’s employment, the referee and board properly disallowed appellant’s claim. Such cases as Oldinsky v. P. & R. C. & I. Co., 92 Pa. Superior Ct. 328 , and MoCoy v.

Schuylkill Haven Borough v. Bolton

181 Pa. Super. 364 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Jul 17, 1956

The Authority, pursuant to resolution of its Board [appointed by the governing body of the borough, in accordance with §7'(a) of the Act] constructed a sanitary sewer in the borough. … McDonald v. Simcox, 98 Pa. 619 ; (the same principles apply to in-formations lodged with such justice in criminal cases. Commonwealth v. Miller & Burke, 77 Pa. Superior Ct. 469 ).

Com. v. AR

990 A.2d 1 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Jan 15, 2010

The Board determined [that] he was not [a sexually violent predator]. [...]. … Commonwealth v.

Com. v. Gerald, M.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Nov 6, 2015

Gerald, No. 2165 WDA 2004, unpublished memorandum (Pa.Super. filed August 24, 2006). 2 Appellant claimed another individual, Jermaine Brown, was playing with the gun and that he became concerned and asked Brown for the … Appellant stated that Brown removed the magazine and handed the gun to appellant.

Heritage Surveyors & Engineers, Inc. v. National Penn Bank

2002 Pa. Super. 194 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Jun 19, 2002

Weik v. … Moser v.

Com. v. Copenhaver, V.

2020 Pa. Super. 214 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Sep 2, 2020

Based on the Pennsylvania Supreme Court’s holdings in Commonwealth v. Leet, 641 A.2d 299 (Pa. 1994) and Commonwealth v. … -6- J-S69043-18 Commonwealth v. Brown, 64 A.3d 1101, 1105 (Pa. Super. 2013), appeal denied, 79 A.3d 1096 (Pa. 2013).

Com. v. Pagan, A.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · May 3, 2016

See Smith v. Pennsylvania Board of Probation and Parole, 683 A.2d 278, 282–283 (Pa. 1996). However, given our disposition of the merits, we decline to remand as it “would be futile to do so.” See Commonwealth v. … Commonwealth v. Brown, 2015 PA Super 24 (Feb. 6, 2015)( citing Commonwealth. v. Bennett, 930 A.2d 1264, 1271 (Pa. 2007)).

Com. v. Fredrick, J., Jr.

2020 Pa. Super. 79 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 31, 2020

In Commonwealth v. … There, the defendant called police to his home after claiming to have ____________________________________________ 4 See, e.g., Brown v. Texas, 856 S.W.2d 177 (Tex. Crim.

Lincoln General Insurance v. Liberty Mutual Insurance

2002 Pa. Super. 208 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Jun 25, 2002

While federal law seemingly requires the authorized carrier to provide liability insurance from the point of dispatch, see Ropos v. Long Transportation Company, 147 F.Supp. 698 (W.D.Pa.1957) and Wilkerson v. … Board of Public Education of the School District of Pittsburgh v. National Union Fire Insurance Co., 709 A.2d 910, 913 (Pa.Super.1998) (en banc). It must be remembered that this admonition applies equally to Lincoln.

Gormley v. Edgar

2010 Pa. Super. 71 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Apr 26, 2010

See Rost v. State Board of Psychology, supra. … See Mulholland v. Dietz, 896 F.Supp. 179 (E.D.Pa.1994) (citations omitted). In Premack v.

Southwest Pennsylvania Pipe Lines v. Rodgers Sand Co.

43 Pa. Super. 524 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Jul 20, 1910

It was also held in Wainwright v. … The exact location of the crossing shall be plainly indicated by suitable sign boards on each bank.”

Com. v. Dickerson, K.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Jul 20, 2015

Commonwealth v. Gamboa–Taylor, 562 Pa. 70, 77, 753 A.2d 780, 783 (2000). Commonwealth v. Brown, 111 A.3d 171, 175-76 (Pa. Super. 2015) (emphasis in original). … In Brown, this court considered an appellant’s contention that § 9545(b)(1)(ii) overcame the PCRA’s time limitations.

Duddy v. Conshohocken Printing Co.

163 Pa. Super. 150 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 24, 1948

The board of directors of that company adopted a resolution approving a joint plan of merger with the Conshohocken Printing Company, which owned all the shares of the Recorder Publishing Company except the ten shares held … See Schlein v. Gairoard, 127 N. J. L. 358, 22 A. 2d 539; Jensen et al. v. Nelson et al. (Iowa), 19 N. W. 2d 596 .

Ontelaunee Orchards, Inc. v. Rothermel

139 Pa. Super. 44 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Nov 13, 1939

We think the case of Covert v. … Justice Brown (later Chief Justice) there stated (pages 343, 344): “We need not consider the cases holding that a railroad company, possessing the right of eminent domain, cannot set up adverse possession for the statutory