COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. NASHADEEM BOSTICK
No. 2228 EDA 2007 2008 PA Super 233 Atlantic: n/a Filed: 9/30/2008
Appeal from the Judgment of Sentence August 3, 2007 In the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County Criminal Division at No. CP-51-CR-0000971-2007
Before: MUSMANNO, BENDER and COLVILLE*, JJ.
Opinion by: BENDER, J.
Nashadeem Bostick appeals from the judgment of sentence of five to ten years’ imprisonment imposed following his convictions of possession with intent to deliver a controlled substance (PWID) and conspiracy. Appellant challenges the trial court’s denial of his pretrial motion to suppress evidence and the sufficiency of the evidence. We affirm.
-----------------------------------------------------
Want 50 state & federal case law? - click here
Tuesday, September 30, 2008
Monday, September 29, 2008
Superior Court 9/29/08 - IN THE MATTER OF: K.K.R.-S., K.M.R., K.A.R., MINORS
IN THE MATTER OF: K.K.R.-S., K.M.R., K.A.R., MINORS APPEAL OF: D.R., NATURAL MOTHER
No. 1429 MDA 2007 2008 PA Super 231 Atlantic: n/a Filed: 9/29/2008
Appeal from the Decrees in the Court of Common Pleas of Dauphin County, Orphans’ Court Division, Nos. 4-ADOPT-2007/7 JD 2004, 5-ADOPT-2007/750 JD 2003 6-ADOPT-2007/JV-693-2006
Before: STEVENS, MUSMANNO and TAMILIA, JJ.
Opinion by: TAMILIA, J.
D.R. appeals from the Decrees terminating her parental rights to K.K.R.-S. (DOB 8/23/00), K.M.R. (DOB 11/14/03), and K.A.R. (DOB 1/31/06).
-----------------------------------------------------
Want 50 state & federal case law? - click here
No. 1429 MDA 2007 2008 PA Super 231 Atlantic: n/a Filed: 9/29/2008
Appeal from the Decrees in the Court of Common Pleas of Dauphin County, Orphans’ Court Division, Nos. 4-ADOPT-2007/7 JD 2004, 5-ADOPT-2007/750 JD 2003 6-ADOPT-2007/JV-693-2006
Before: STEVENS, MUSMANNO and TAMILIA, JJ.
Opinion by: TAMILIA, J.
D.R. appeals from the Decrees terminating her parental rights to K.K.R.-S. (DOB 8/23/00), K.M.R. (DOB 11/14/03), and K.A.R. (DOB 1/31/06).
-----------------------------------------------------
Want 50 state & federal case law? - click here
Superior Court 9/29/08 - COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. MICHAEL T. WILLIAMS
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. MICHAEL T. WILLIAMS
No. 1013 MDA 2007 2008 PA Super 232 Atlantic: n/a Filed: 9/29/2008
Appeal from the Judgment of Sentence entered April 30, 2007 In the Court of Common Pleas of Luzerne County Criminal at No(s): CP-40-CR-0002956-2005
Before: PANELLA, SHOGAN, and KELLY, JJ.
Opinion by: PANELLA, J.
Appellant, Michael T. Williams, appeals from the judgment of sentence entered on April 30, 2007, by the Honorable Peter Paul Olszewski, Jr., Court of Common Pleas of Luzerne County. After careful review, we affirm.
-----------------------------------------------------
Want 50 state & federal case law? - click here
No. 1013 MDA 2007 2008 PA Super 232 Atlantic: n/a Filed: 9/29/2008
Appeal from the Judgment of Sentence entered April 30, 2007 In the Court of Common Pleas of Luzerne County Criminal at No(s): CP-40-CR-0002956-2005
Before: PANELLA, SHOGAN, and KELLY, JJ.
Opinion by: PANELLA, J.
Appellant, Michael T. Williams, appeals from the judgment of sentence entered on April 30, 2007, by the Honorable Peter Paul Olszewski, Jr., Court of Common Pleas of Luzerne County. After careful review, we affirm.
-----------------------------------------------------
Want 50 state & federal case law? - click here
Superior Court 9/29/08 - COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. JOSEPH J. JENNINGS, JR.
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. JOSEPH J. JENNINGS, JR.
No. 1090 MDA 2007 2008 PA Super 230 Atlantic: n/a Filed: 9/29/2008
Appeal from the Judgment of Sentence April 14, 2004 In the Court of Common Pleas of Lycoming County Criminal at No(s): CP-41-CR-0000342-2003
Before: STEVENS, MUSMANNO, and TAMILIA, JJ.
Opinion by: STEVENS, J.
Dissenting Opinion by: MUSMANNO, J.
This is an appeal nunc pro tunc from the judgment of sentence entered in the Court of Common Pleas of Lycoming County subsequent to Appellant’s convictions for one count of sexual assault and two counts of indecent assault, and his acquittal on a charge of rape. On appeal, Appellant contends (1) the trial court erred in qualifying a sexual assault nurse as an expert witness and permitting her to make a “medical diagnosis” of the victim’s condition, and (2) the jury’s verdict was against the weight of the evidence based on the factual record and the jury’s verdict was inconsistent. We affirm the judgment of sentence.
-----------------------------------------------------
Want 50 state & federal case law? - click here
No. 1090 MDA 2007 2008 PA Super 230 Atlantic: n/a Filed: 9/29/2008
Appeal from the Judgment of Sentence April 14, 2004 In the Court of Common Pleas of Lycoming County Criminal at No(s): CP-41-CR-0000342-2003
Before: STEVENS, MUSMANNO, and TAMILIA, JJ.
Opinion by: STEVENS, J.
Dissenting Opinion by: MUSMANNO, J.
This is an appeal nunc pro tunc from the judgment of sentence entered in the Court of Common Pleas of Lycoming County subsequent to Appellant’s convictions for one count of sexual assault and two counts of indecent assault, and his acquittal on a charge of rape. On appeal, Appellant contends (1) the trial court erred in qualifying a sexual assault nurse as an expert witness and permitting her to make a “medical diagnosis” of the victim’s condition, and (2) the jury’s verdict was against the weight of the evidence based on the factual record and the jury’s verdict was inconsistent. We affirm the judgment of sentence.
-----------------------------------------------------
Want 50 state & federal case law? - click here
Superior Court 9/29/08 - LISA DILLON v. HOMEOWNER’S SELECT, AFFINITY INSURANCE SERVICES, INC.,
LISA DILLON v. HOMEOWNER’S SELECT, AFFINITY INSURANCE SERVICES, INC.,
No. 2969 EDA 2006 2008 PA Super 229 Atlantic: n/a Filed: 9/29/2008
Appeal from the Order entered October 25, 2006, Court of Common Pleas, Montgomery County, Civil Division at No. 06-03005
Before: BOWES, DONOHUE, and POPOVICH, JJ.
Opinion by: DONOHUE, J.
In a case of first impression, we address whether Appellant Lisa Dillon (“Dillon”) may assert a cause of action for money damages against a private employer for gender-based discrimination under the Equal Rights Amendment of the Pennsylvania Constitution. Pa. Const., art. I, § 28. We conclude that there is no private right of action for damages against a private employer under the Equal Rights Amendment and therefore affirm the trial court’s dismissal of Dillon’s case.
-----------------------------------------------------
Want 50 state & federal case law? - click here
No. 2969 EDA 2006 2008 PA Super 229 Atlantic: n/a Filed: 9/29/2008
Appeal from the Order entered October 25, 2006, Court of Common Pleas, Montgomery County, Civil Division at No. 06-03005
Before: BOWES, DONOHUE, and POPOVICH, JJ.
Opinion by: DONOHUE, J.
In a case of first impression, we address whether Appellant Lisa Dillon (“Dillon”) may assert a cause of action for money damages against a private employer for gender-based discrimination under the Equal Rights Amendment of the Pennsylvania Constitution. Pa. Const., art. I, § 28. We conclude that there is no private right of action for damages against a private employer under the Equal Rights Amendment and therefore affirm the trial court’s dismissal of Dillon’s case.
-----------------------------------------------------
Want 50 state & federal case law? - click here
Superior Court 9/29/08 - IN THE INTEREST OF: R.Y., JR.
IN THE INTEREST OF: R.Y., JR. APPEAL OF: R.Y., JR.
No. 3415 EDA 2007 2008 PA Super 228 Atlantic: n/a Filed: 9/29/2008
Appeal from the Order entered on August 15, 2007, in the Court of Common Pleas of Wayne County, Civil Division, at No(s). 267-2007-Civil
Before: LALLY-GREEN, KLEIN, and GANTMAN, JJ
Opinion by: LALLY-GREEN, J.
Appellant, R.Y., Jr., appeals from the order entered on August 15, 2007, directing him to undergo immediate commitment to an involuntary inpatient treatment facility under Act 21, 42 Pa.C.S.A. § 6401 et seq. We affirm.
-----------------------------------------------------
Want 50 state & federal case law? - click here
No. 3415 EDA 2007 2008 PA Super 228 Atlantic: n/a Filed: 9/29/2008
Appeal from the Order entered on August 15, 2007, in the Court of Common Pleas of Wayne County, Civil Division, at No(s). 267-2007-Civil
Before: LALLY-GREEN, KLEIN, and GANTMAN, JJ
Opinion by: LALLY-GREEN, J.
Appellant, R.Y., Jr., appeals from the order entered on August 15, 2007, directing him to undergo immediate commitment to an involuntary inpatient treatment facility under Act 21, 42 Pa.C.S.A. § 6401 et seq. We affirm.
-----------------------------------------------------
Want 50 state & federal case law? - click here
Friday, September 26, 2008
Superior Court - 9/26/08 - COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. SUNCERAY B. PANTALION
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. SUNCERAY B. PANTALION
No. 1379 MDA 2007 2008 PA Super 226 Atlantic: n/a Filed: 9/26/2008
Appeal from the Judgment of Sentence July 10, 2007 In the Court of Common Pleas of Schuylkill County Criminal, No. CP-54-CR-0002048-2005
Before: GANTMAN, ALLEN, AND HUDOCK, JJ.
Opinion by: GANTMAN, J.
Appellant, Sunceray B. Pantalion, appeals from the judgment of sentence entered in the Schuylkill County Court of Common Pleas, following her guilty plea to one count each of forgery, tampering with records, theft by unlawful taking, and theft by deception. Appellant asks us to determine whether the trial court erred in grading forgery of a money order as a second-degree felony. We hold Appellant’s negotiation of a counterfeit United States Postal Service money order constituted a second-degree felony under the forgery statute. Accordingly, we affirm.
-----------------------------------------------------
Want 50 state & federal case law? - click here
No. 1379 MDA 2007 2008 PA Super 226 Atlantic: n/a Filed: 9/26/2008
Appeal from the Judgment of Sentence July 10, 2007 In the Court of Common Pleas of Schuylkill County Criminal, No. CP-54-CR-0002048-2005
Before: GANTMAN, ALLEN, AND HUDOCK, JJ.
Opinion by: GANTMAN, J.
Appellant, Sunceray B. Pantalion, appeals from the judgment of sentence entered in the Schuylkill County Court of Common Pleas, following her guilty plea to one count each of forgery, tampering with records, theft by unlawful taking, and theft by deception. Appellant asks us to determine whether the trial court erred in grading forgery of a money order as a second-degree felony. We hold Appellant’s negotiation of a counterfeit United States Postal Service money order constituted a second-degree felony under the forgery statute. Accordingly, we affirm.
-----------------------------------------------------
Want 50 state & federal case law? - click here
Superior Court - 9/26/08 - RAIT PARTNERSHIP, L.P., RAIT EMERALD POINTE, INC. AND RAIT BUCKNER, LLC v. E POINTE PROPERTIES I, LTD., E POINTE PROPERTIES
RAIT PARTNERSHIP, L.P., RAIT EMERALD POINTE, INC. AND RAIT BUCKNER, LLC v. E POINTE PROPERTIES I, LTD., E POINTE PROPERTIES, INC., PARK HOLLOW APARTMENTS, LTD., EMERALD HOLLOW PROPERTIES, INC., HAROLD R. DEMOSS, III, JOHN W. McCRARY, WILLIAM L. KARRINGTON, JAN G. DEMOSS, FRED N. HIMBURG, FRED B. HIMBURG, JEFFREY S. JOHNSON AND BUCKNER APARTMENT PARTNERS #1, LTD. Appellants
No. 2749 EDA 2007 2008 PA Super 225 Atlantic: n/a Filed: 9/26/2008
Appeal from the Order entered September 28, 2007, in the Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County, Civil, May Term, 2007, No. 0005
Before: DONOHUE, J., McEWEN, P.J.E., and FITZGERALD, J.*
Opinion by: McEWEN, P.J.E.
Concurring Opinion by: FITZGERALD, J.
Appellants, E Pointe Properties I, Ltd., E Pointe Properties, Inc., Park Hollow Apartments, Ltd., Emerald Hollow Properties, Inc., Harold R. DeMoss, III, John W. McCrary, William L. Karrington, Jan G. DeMoss, Fred N. Himburg, Fred B. Himburg, Jeffrey S. Johnson, and Buckner Apartments Partners #1, Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “E Pointe”), appeal from the order denying their motion to open or strike the confessed judgment that had been entered against them by appellees, RAIT Partnership, L.P., RAIT Emerald Pointe, Inc., and RAIT Buckner, LLC (hereinafter “RAIT”). We affirm.
-----------------------------------------------------
Want 50 state & federal case law? - click here
No. 2749 EDA 2007 2008 PA Super 225 Atlantic: n/a Filed: 9/26/2008
Appeal from the Order entered September 28, 2007, in the Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County, Civil, May Term, 2007, No. 0005
Before: DONOHUE, J., McEWEN, P.J.E., and FITZGERALD, J.*
Opinion by: McEWEN, P.J.E.
Concurring Opinion by: FITZGERALD, J.
Appellants, E Pointe Properties I, Ltd., E Pointe Properties, Inc., Park Hollow Apartments, Ltd., Emerald Hollow Properties, Inc., Harold R. DeMoss, III, John W. McCrary, William L. Karrington, Jan G. DeMoss, Fred N. Himburg, Fred B. Himburg, Jeffrey S. Johnson, and Buckner Apartments Partners #1, Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “E Pointe”), appeal from the order denying their motion to open or strike the confessed judgment that had been entered against them by appellees, RAIT Partnership, L.P., RAIT Emerald Pointe, Inc., and RAIT Buckner, LLC (hereinafter “RAIT”). We affirm.
-----------------------------------------------------
Want 50 state & federal case law? - click here
Superior Court - 9/26/08 - MARVIN E. HERR AND YVONNE S. HERR v. DONALD C. HERR, CYNTHIA T. EVANS-HERR, BRIAN J. EVANKO & DAWN R. EVANKO
MARVIN E. HERR AND YVONNE S. HERR v. DONALD C. HERR, CYNTHIA T. EVANS-HERR, BRIAN J. EVANKO & DAWN R. EVANKO
No. 1109 MDA 2007 2008 PA Super 227 Atlantic: n/a Filed: 9/26/2008
Appeal from the Order Entered May 22, 2007, Court of Common Pleas, Lancaster County, Civil Division, at No. CI-06-00092.
Before: LALLY-GREEN, SHOGAN and COLVILLE, JJ.
Opinion by: SHOGAN, J.
Donald C. Herr and Cynthia T. Evans-Herr (collectively “the Donald Herrs”) and Brian J. Evanko and Dawn R. Evanko (collectively “Evankos”) appeal from the order granting the motion for summary judgment filed by Marvin E. Herr and Yvonne S. Herr (collectively “the Marvin Herrs”) and denying the motion for summary judgment filed by the Donald Herrs and Evankos. We reverse and remand.
-----------------------------------------------------
Want 50 state & federal case law? - click here
No. 1109 MDA 2007 2008 PA Super 227 Atlantic: n/a Filed: 9/26/2008
Appeal from the Order Entered May 22, 2007, Court of Common Pleas, Lancaster County, Civil Division, at No. CI-06-00092.
Before: LALLY-GREEN, SHOGAN and COLVILLE, JJ.
Opinion by: SHOGAN, J.
Donald C. Herr and Cynthia T. Evans-Herr (collectively “the Donald Herrs”) and Brian J. Evanko and Dawn R. Evanko (collectively “Evankos”) appeal from the order granting the motion for summary judgment filed by Marvin E. Herr and Yvonne S. Herr (collectively “the Marvin Herrs”) and denying the motion for summary judgment filed by the Donald Herrs and Evankos. We reverse and remand.
-----------------------------------------------------
Want 50 state & federal case law? - click here
Tuesday, September 23, 2008
Superior Court 9/23/08 - COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. THOMAS O'MALLEY, JR.
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. THOMAS O'MALLEY, JR.
No. 415 EDA 2008 2008 PA Super 224 Atlantic: n/a Filed: 9/23/2008
Appeal from the Judgment of Sentence of December 7, 2007, in the Court of Common Pleas of Delaware County, Criminal Division at No. CP-23-CR-0004121-2007
Before: FORD ELLIOTT, P.J., BOWES and COLVILLE*, JJ.
Opinion by: COLVILLE, J.
Thomas O’Malley (“Petitioner”) petitions for allowance of appeal with respect to the discretionary aspects of his sentence. His counsel has filed a petition to withdraw and a brief under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), alleging this matter is wholly frivolous. We grant counsel’s petition to withdraw and deny the petition for allowance of appeal.
-----------------------------------------------------
Want 50 state & federal case law? - click here
No. 415 EDA 2008 2008 PA Super 224 Atlantic: n/a Filed: 9/23/2008
Appeal from the Judgment of Sentence of December 7, 2007, in the Court of Common Pleas of Delaware County, Criminal Division at No. CP-23-CR-0004121-2007
Before: FORD ELLIOTT, P.J., BOWES and COLVILLE*, JJ.
Opinion by: COLVILLE, J.
Thomas O’Malley (“Petitioner”) petitions for allowance of appeal with respect to the discretionary aspects of his sentence. His counsel has filed a petition to withdraw and a brief under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), alleging this matter is wholly frivolous. We grant counsel’s petition to withdraw and deny the petition for allowance of appeal.
-----------------------------------------------------
Want 50 state & federal case law? - click here
Monday, September 22, 2008
Superior Court 9/22/08 - SHARON SABO, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ESTATE OF HELEN P. ALTIERI, DECEASED v. V. THOMAS WORRALL III
SHARON SABO, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ESTATE OF HELEN P. ALTIERI, DECEASED v. V. THOMAS WORRALL III, M.D.; THREE RIVERS ORTHOPEDIC ASSOCIATES-UPMC; UPMC ST. MARGARET; SIRI M.B. DESILVA, M.D.; AND MICHAEL TROMBLEY, M.D.
No. 1279 WDA 2007 2008 PA Super 223 Atlantic: n/a Filed: 9/22/2008
Appeal from the Order June 12, 2007, In the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County, Civil Division at No. GD 06-5888
Before: MUSMANNO, POPOVICH, and HUDOCK, JJ.
Opinion by: POPOVICH, J.
Appellant Sharon Sabo, individually and as personal representative of the Estate of Helen P. Altieri, deceased, appeals the judgment of non pros entered in favor of Appellees V. Thomas Worrall III, M.D., Three Rivers Orthopedic Associates – UPMC, UPMC St. Margaret, Siri M.B. DeSilva, M.D., and Michael Trombley, M.D., claiming that her counsel’s omission in filing certificates of merit (“COM”) being inadvertent, the trial court abused its discretion in not opening the judgment of non pros. We reverse.
-----------------------------------------------------
Want 50 state & federal case law? - click here
No. 1279 WDA 2007 2008 PA Super 223 Atlantic: n/a Filed: 9/22/2008
Appeal from the Order June 12, 2007, In the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County, Civil Division at No. GD 06-5888
Before: MUSMANNO, POPOVICH, and HUDOCK, JJ.
Opinion by: POPOVICH, J.
Appellant Sharon Sabo, individually and as personal representative of the Estate of Helen P. Altieri, deceased, appeals the judgment of non pros entered in favor of Appellees V. Thomas Worrall III, M.D., Three Rivers Orthopedic Associates – UPMC, UPMC St. Margaret, Siri M.B. DeSilva, M.D., and Michael Trombley, M.D., claiming that her counsel’s omission in filing certificates of merit (“COM”) being inadvertent, the trial court abused its discretion in not opening the judgment of non pros. We reverse.
-----------------------------------------------------
Want 50 state & federal case law? - click here
Superior Court 9/22/08 - COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. PEDRO GREEN
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. PEDRO GREEN
No. 2059 EDA 2007 2008 PA Super 220 Atlantic: n/a Filed: 9/22/2008
Appeal from the PCRA Order July 26, 2007 In the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County Criminal Division at Nos.: CP-51-CR-1102701-2000 CP-51-CR-1104561-2000
Before: MUSMANNO, BENDER and COLVILLE*, JJ.
Opinion by: BENDER, J.
Concurring and Dissenting Opinion by: COLVILLE, J.
Pedro Green (Appellant) appeals from the order dismissing his petition filed under the Post Conviction Relief Act (PCRA), 42 Pa.C.S. §§ 9541-9546. Appellant claims that trial counsel rendered ineffective assistance by failing to file a post-sentence motion challenging the excessiveness of Appellant’s sentence. For the reasons that follow, we reverse.
-----------------------------------------------------
Want 50 state & federal case law? - click here
No. 2059 EDA 2007 2008 PA Super 220 Atlantic: n/a Filed: 9/22/2008
Appeal from the PCRA Order July 26, 2007 In the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County Criminal Division at Nos.: CP-51-CR-1102701-2000 CP-51-CR-1104561-2000
Before: MUSMANNO, BENDER and COLVILLE*, JJ.
Opinion by: BENDER, J.
Concurring and Dissenting Opinion by: COLVILLE, J.
Pedro Green (Appellant) appeals from the order dismissing his petition filed under the Post Conviction Relief Act (PCRA), 42 Pa.C.S. §§ 9541-9546. Appellant claims that trial counsel rendered ineffective assistance by failing to file a post-sentence motion challenging the excessiveness of Appellant’s sentence. For the reasons that follow, we reverse.
-----------------------------------------------------
Want 50 state & federal case law? - click here
Superior Court 9/22/08 - RICHARD BETZ AND DONNA BETZ v. ERIE INSURANCE EXCHANGE
RICHARD BETZ AND DONNA BETZ v. ERIE INSURANCE EXCHANGE
No. 3067 EDA 2007 2008 PA Super 221 Atlantic: n/a Filed: 9/22/2008
Appeal from the Judgment Entered January 3, 2008 In the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County Civil Division at No.: No. 1247 September Term, 2005
Before: STEVENS, MUSMANNO and BENDER, JJ.
Opinion by: BENDER, J.
Erie Insurance Exchange appeals the judgment in favor of Richard Betz and Donna Betz (the Betzes), which awarded damages on the Betzes’ claims for insurance coverage under a “Sinkhole Collapse” endorsement to the Betzes’ homeowners’ insurance policy. Initially, Erie raises multiple claims of error in support of an award of a new trial. These claims include, inter alia, error in finding the Sinkhole Collapse endorsement legally ambiguous, apportioning the burden of proof to demonstrate coverage under the policy, admitting certain testimony of the Betzes’ expert while restricting other testimony by Erie’s expert, instructing the jury concerning exclusions under Erie’s policy of insurance, and refusing special interrogatories to the jury. In addition, Erie asserts that the trial court should properly have entered judgment notwithstanding the verdict, and the court abused its discretion in denying Erie’s motion for remittitur. Upon review, we find Erie’s claims without merit. According, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.
-----------------------------------------------------
Want 50 state & federal case law? - click here
No. 3067 EDA 2007 2008 PA Super 221 Atlantic: n/a Filed: 9/22/2008
Appeal from the Judgment Entered January 3, 2008 In the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County Civil Division at No.: No. 1247 September Term, 2005
Before: STEVENS, MUSMANNO and BENDER, JJ.
Opinion by: BENDER, J.
Erie Insurance Exchange appeals the judgment in favor of Richard Betz and Donna Betz (the Betzes), which awarded damages on the Betzes’ claims for insurance coverage under a “Sinkhole Collapse” endorsement to the Betzes’ homeowners’ insurance policy. Initially, Erie raises multiple claims of error in support of an award of a new trial. These claims include, inter alia, error in finding the Sinkhole Collapse endorsement legally ambiguous, apportioning the burden of proof to demonstrate coverage under the policy, admitting certain testimony of the Betzes’ expert while restricting other testimony by Erie’s expert, instructing the jury concerning exclusions under Erie’s policy of insurance, and refusing special interrogatories to the jury. In addition, Erie asserts that the trial court should properly have entered judgment notwithstanding the verdict, and the court abused its discretion in denying Erie’s motion for remittitur. Upon review, we find Erie’s claims without merit. According, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.
-----------------------------------------------------
Want 50 state & federal case law? - click here
Superior Court 9/22/08 - THE LAW OFFICE OF DOUGLAS T. HARRIS, ESQUIRE, AND DOUGLAS T. HARRIS, ESQUIRE, v. PHILADELPHIA WATERFRONT PARTNERS, LP........
THE LAW OFFICE OF DOUGLAS T. HARRIS, ESQUIRE, AND DOUGLAS T. HARRIS, ESQUIRE, v. PHILADELPHIA WATERFRONT PARTNERS, LP AND CHARLES L. KAMPS III AND SCOTT A. BLOW AND PATRICK T. HANLEY AND TODD KAMPS PHILADELPHIA WATERFRONT PARTNERS LP AND PHILADELPHIA WATERFRONT DEVELOPMENT, LLC, CHARLES L. KAMPS III AND SCOTT A. BLOW AND PATRICK T. HANLEY v. CHURCHILL DEVELOPMENT GROUP, LLC, CHURCHILL RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT LP, CHURCHILL COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT, LP, JOSEPH F. LOGUE, JR. AND DOUGLAS T. HARRIS, ESQUIRE
No. 2872 & 2873 EDA 2007 2008 PA Super 222 Atlantic: n/a Filed: 9/22/2008
Appeal from the Order entered in the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County, Civil Division, No(s): June Term 2007, No. 02576 and January Term 2007, No. 03811
Before: BOWES, GANTMAN and TAMILIA, JJ.
Opinion by: TAMILIA, J.
Dissenting Opinion by: BOWES, J.
At 2872 EDA 2007, Philadelphia Waterfront Partners, LP (PWP), Charles L. Kamps III, Scott A. Blow, Patrick T. Hanley, and Todd Kamps appeal from the October 22, 2007, Order granting The Law Office of Douglas T. Harris, Esquire and Douglas T. Harris, Esquire’s motion to compel and directing production of aforementioned appellants’ Blow and Hanley’s broken computers for discovery. At 2873 EDA 2007, PWP, Philadelphia Waterfront Development, LLC (PWD), Kamps III, Blow, and Hanley appeal from a companion Order, also dated October 22, 2007, granting Harris’s motion to compel and also directing production of Blow and Hanley’s broken computers. On December 10, 2007, we granted PWP, et al.’s application for consolidation.
-----------------------------------------------------
Want 50 state & federal case law? - click here
No. 2872 & 2873 EDA 2007 2008 PA Super 222 Atlantic: n/a Filed: 9/22/2008
Appeal from the Order entered in the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County, Civil Division, No(s): June Term 2007, No. 02576 and January Term 2007, No. 03811
Before: BOWES, GANTMAN and TAMILIA, JJ.
Opinion by: TAMILIA, J.
Dissenting Opinion by: BOWES, J.
At 2872 EDA 2007, Philadelphia Waterfront Partners, LP (PWP), Charles L. Kamps III, Scott A. Blow, Patrick T. Hanley, and Todd Kamps appeal from the October 22, 2007, Order granting The Law Office of Douglas T. Harris, Esquire and Douglas T. Harris, Esquire’s motion to compel and directing production of aforementioned appellants’ Blow and Hanley’s broken computers for discovery. At 2873 EDA 2007, PWP, Philadelphia Waterfront Development, LLC (PWD), Kamps III, Blow, and Hanley appeal from a companion Order, also dated October 22, 2007, granting Harris’s motion to compel and also directing production of Blow and Hanley’s broken computers. On December 10, 2007, we granted PWP, et al.’s application for consolidation.
-----------------------------------------------------
Want 50 state & federal case law? - click here
Friday, September 19, 2008
Superior Court 9/19/08 - COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. WILLIAM JOSEPH LOVE
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. WILLIAM JOSEPH LOVE
No. 3431 EDA 2007 2008 PA Super 218 Atlantic: n/a Filed: 9/19/2008
Appeal from the Judgment of Sentence dated November 15, 2007 In the Court of Common Pleas of Chester County Criminal No. CP-15-CR-0000321-2007
Before: ORIE MELVIN, KLEIN, and FITZGERALD,* JJ.
Opinion by: FITZGERALD, J.
Appellant, William Joseph Love, appeals from the judgment of sentence entered in the Chester County Court of Common Pleas. Appellant asks us to determine whether the trial court erred by sentencing him as a repeat offender for his second driving under the influence (DUI) conviction because, as a result of his decision to accept accelerated rehabilitative disposition (ARD), Appellant had not been sentenced on his first DUI offense when he committed the instant offense. We hold that, despite its subsequent revocation, the trial court properly considered his acceptance of ARD as a prior offense occurring within the ten-year look-back period pursuant to Section 3806(b) of the Motor Vehicle Code. See 75 Pa.C.S. § 3806(b). Accordingly, we affirm.
-----------------------------------------------------
Want 50 state & federal case law? - click here
No. 3431 EDA 2007 2008 PA Super 218 Atlantic: n/a Filed: 9/19/2008
Appeal from the Judgment of Sentence dated November 15, 2007 In the Court of Common Pleas of Chester County Criminal No. CP-15-CR-0000321-2007
Before: ORIE MELVIN, KLEIN, and FITZGERALD,* JJ.
Opinion by: FITZGERALD, J.
Appellant, William Joseph Love, appeals from the judgment of sentence entered in the Chester County Court of Common Pleas. Appellant asks us to determine whether the trial court erred by sentencing him as a repeat offender for his second driving under the influence (DUI) conviction because, as a result of his decision to accept accelerated rehabilitative disposition (ARD), Appellant had not been sentenced on his first DUI offense when he committed the instant offense. We hold that, despite its subsequent revocation, the trial court properly considered his acceptance of ARD as a prior offense occurring within the ten-year look-back period pursuant to Section 3806(b) of the Motor Vehicle Code. See 75 Pa.C.S. § 3806(b). Accordingly, we affirm.
-----------------------------------------------------
Want 50 state & federal case law? - click here
Thursday, September 18, 2008
Superior Court 9/18/08 - R.C. v. J.S.
R.C. v. J.S.
No. 1174 WDA 2008 2008 PA Super 219 Atlantic: n/a Filed: 9/18/2008
Appeal from the Order of May 24, 2007,in the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County,Family Court Division, at No. FD 95-09765-016.
Before: STEVENS and BOWES, JJ. and MCEWEN, P.J.E.
Opinion by: BOWES, J.
The question presented on appeal is whether child support can be suspended based upon a temporary institutionalization of the child. We answer that inquiry in the negative and therefore reverse.
-----------------------------------------------------
Want 50 state & federal case law? - click here
No. 1174 WDA 2008 2008 PA Super 219 Atlantic: n/a Filed: 9/18/2008
Appeal from the Order of May 24, 2007,in the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County,Family Court Division, at No. FD 95-09765-016.
Before: STEVENS and BOWES, JJ. and MCEWEN, P.J.E.
Opinion by: BOWES, J.
The question presented on appeal is whether child support can be suspended based upon a temporary institutionalization of the child. We answer that inquiry in the negative and therefore reverse.
-----------------------------------------------------
Want 50 state & federal case law? - click here
Superior Court 9/18/08 - COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. RYAN A. McBRIDE
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. RYAN A. McBRIDE
No. 2111 WDA 2007 2008 PA Super 216 Atlantic: n/a Filed: 9/18/2008
Appeal from the Judgment of Sentence entered October 26, 2007In the Court of Common Pleas of Clearfield CountyCriminal No. CP-17-CR-1033-2002
Before: STEVENS, ALLEN and TAMILIA, JJ.
Opinion by: ALLEN, J.
Appellant, Ryan A. McBride, appeals from the judgment of sentence entered following revocation of his probation. We remand for further proceedings.
-----------------------------------------------------
Want 50 state & federal case law? - click here
No. 2111 WDA 2007 2008 PA Super 216 Atlantic: n/a Filed: 9/18/2008
Appeal from the Judgment of Sentence entered October 26, 2007In the Court of Common Pleas of Clearfield CountyCriminal No. CP-17-CR-1033-2002
Before: STEVENS, ALLEN and TAMILIA, JJ.
Opinion by: ALLEN, J.
Appellant, Ryan A. McBride, appeals from the judgment of sentence entered following revocation of his probation. We remand for further proceedings.
-----------------------------------------------------
Want 50 state & federal case law? - click here
Superior Court 9/18/08 - THOMAS A. JOSEPH, ACUMARK, INC. v.THE SCRANTON TIMES L.P., THE TIMES PARTNER, AND EDWARD LEWIS
THOMAS A. JOSEPH, ACUMARK, INC. v.THE SCRANTON TIMES L.P., THE TIMES PARTNER, AND EDWARD LEWIS
No. 2144 MDA 2006 2008 PA Super 217 Atlantic: n/a Filed: 9/18/2008
Appeal from the Judgment November 16, 2006,In the Court of Common Pleas of Luzerne County,Civil Division at No. 3816-C of 2002.
Before: FORD ELLIOTT, P.J., DONOHUE, and POPOVICH, JJ.
Opinion by: POPOVICH, J.
This is an appeal from the November 16, 2006 judgment entered in the Court of Common Pleas, Luzerne County, in favor of Thomas A. Joseph (Appellee Joseph) and Acumark, Inc., (Appellee Acumark) (collectively Appellees) in their defamation action. The Scranton Times LP, The Times Partner, and Edward Lewis (collectively Appellants) claim that the trial court erred in entering judgment in favor of Appellees because Appellees failed to meet their constitutionally-mandated burdens to prove falsity and fault and that they failed to prove injury as a result of the alleged defamatory statements. Upon review, we affirm the judgment.
-----------------------------------------------------
Want 50 state & federal case law? - click here
No. 2144 MDA 2006 2008 PA Super 217 Atlantic: n/a Filed: 9/18/2008
Appeal from the Judgment November 16, 2006,In the Court of Common Pleas of Luzerne County,Civil Division at No. 3816-C of 2002.
Before: FORD ELLIOTT, P.J., DONOHUE, and POPOVICH, JJ.
Opinion by: POPOVICH, J.
This is an appeal from the November 16, 2006 judgment entered in the Court of Common Pleas, Luzerne County, in favor of Thomas A. Joseph (Appellee Joseph) and Acumark, Inc., (Appellee Acumark) (collectively Appellees) in their defamation action. The Scranton Times LP, The Times Partner, and Edward Lewis (collectively Appellants) claim that the trial court erred in entering judgment in favor of Appellees because Appellees failed to meet their constitutionally-mandated burdens to prove falsity and fault and that they failed to prove injury as a result of the alleged defamatory statements. Upon review, we affirm the judgment.
-----------------------------------------------------
Want 50 state & federal case law? - click here
Wednesday, September 17, 2008
Superior Court 9/17/08 - COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA vs. BRIAN YASIPOUR, SR.
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA vs. BRIAN YASIPOUR, SR.
No. 1474 MDA 2006 2008 PA Super 214 Atlantic: n/a Filed: 9/17/2008
Appeal from the Judgment of Sentence Entered June 2, 2006, Court of Common Pleas, Lycoming County,Criminal Division, at No. CP-41-CR-0001465-2001
Before: LALLY-GREEN, SHOGAN and COLVILLE, JJ.
Opinion by: SHOGAN, J.
Appellant, Brian Yasipour, Sr., appeals from the judgment of sentence entered following his convictions of third degree murder, possession of an instrument of crime, and tampering with evidence. We affirm.
-----------------------------------------------------
Want 50 state & federal case law? - click here
No. 1474 MDA 2006 2008 PA Super 214 Atlantic: n/a Filed: 9/17/2008
Appeal from the Judgment of Sentence Entered June 2, 2006, Court of Common Pleas, Lycoming County,Criminal Division, at No. CP-41-CR-0001465-2001
Before: LALLY-GREEN, SHOGAN and COLVILLE, JJ.
Opinion by: SHOGAN, J.
Appellant, Brian Yasipour, Sr., appeals from the judgment of sentence entered following his convictions of third degree murder, possession of an instrument of crime, and tampering with evidence. We affirm.
-----------------------------------------------------
Want 50 state & federal case law? - click here
Superior Court 9/17/08 - KMART OF PENNSYLVANIA L.P. v.MD MALL ASSOCIATES, LLC, TRADING AS MACDADE MALL ASSOCIATES, L.P.
KMART OF PENNSYLVANIA L.P. v.MD MALL ASSOCIATES, LLC, TRADING AS MACDADE MALL ASSOCIATES, L.P.
No. 3371 and3501 EDA 2006 2008 PA Super 213 Atlantic: n/a Filed: 9/17/2008
Appeal from the Order Entered December 5, 2006In the Court of Common Pleas of Delaware CountyCivil at No(s): 05-684 Consolidated w/#05-4645
Before: STEVENS, KLEIN, and POPOVICH, JJ.
Opinion by: STEVENS, J.
Kmart of Pennsylvania, L.P. (“Kmart”) appeals from the orders entered in the Court of Common Pleas of Delaware County on November 6, 2006 and December 5, 2006, which granted summary judgment in favor of MD Mall Associates, LLC, trading as MacDade Mall Associates, L.P. (“MacDade”), on both Kmart’s Complaint for Declaratory Relief and MacDade’s Complaint and Counterclaim for Ejectment. We reverse and remand for proceedings consistent with this decision.
-----------------------------------------------------
Want 50 state & federal case law? - click here
No. 3371 and3501 EDA 2006 2008 PA Super 213 Atlantic: n/a Filed: 9/17/2008
Appeal from the Order Entered December 5, 2006In the Court of Common Pleas of Delaware CountyCivil at No(s): 05-684 Consolidated w/#05-4645
Before: STEVENS, KLEIN, and POPOVICH, JJ.
Opinion by: STEVENS, J.
Kmart of Pennsylvania, L.P. (“Kmart”) appeals from the orders entered in the Court of Common Pleas of Delaware County on November 6, 2006 and December 5, 2006, which granted summary judgment in favor of MD Mall Associates, LLC, trading as MacDade Mall Associates, L.P. (“MacDade”), on both Kmart’s Complaint for Declaratory Relief and MacDade’s Complaint and Counterclaim for Ejectment. We reverse and remand for proceedings consistent with this decision.
-----------------------------------------------------
Want 50 state & federal case law? - click here
Superior Court 9/17/08 - COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA vs. STEVEN MANN
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA vs. STEVEN MANN
No. 170 MDA 2007 2008 PA Super 215 Atlantic: n/a Filed: 9/17/2008
Appeal from the Order entered December 22, 2006,In the Court of Common Pleas of Lancaster CountyCriminal No. CP-36-CR-0005755-2005
Before: FORD ELLIOTT, P.J., ALLEN and KELLY, JJ.
Opinion by: KELLY, J.
Appellant, Steven Mann, appeals from the judgment of sentence imposed following his conviction of DUI, possession of drug paraphernalia, and terroristic threats. The question to be resolved is whether the trial court erred in granting defense counsel’s request that no credit for time served be included in the sentencing order so that the time could later be applied by the Board of Probation & Parole as back time to Appellant’s original sentence. We hold that because the Board is without jurisdiction to apply credit when it is omitted from a sentencing order, the sentencing court must include credit for time served in the order imposing sentence for an appellant’s new offenses. We vacate and remand.
-----------------------------------------------------
Want 50 state & federal case law? - click here
No. 170 MDA 2007 2008 PA Super 215 Atlantic: n/a Filed: 9/17/2008
Appeal from the Order entered December 22, 2006,In the Court of Common Pleas of Lancaster CountyCriminal No. CP-36-CR-0005755-2005
Before: FORD ELLIOTT, P.J., ALLEN and KELLY, JJ.
Opinion by: KELLY, J.
Appellant, Steven Mann, appeals from the judgment of sentence imposed following his conviction of DUI, possession of drug paraphernalia, and terroristic threats. The question to be resolved is whether the trial court erred in granting defense counsel’s request that no credit for time served be included in the sentencing order so that the time could later be applied by the Board of Probation & Parole as back time to Appellant’s original sentence. We hold that because the Board is without jurisdiction to apply credit when it is omitted from a sentencing order, the sentencing court must include credit for time served in the order imposing sentence for an appellant’s new offenses. We vacate and remand.
-----------------------------------------------------
Want 50 state & federal case law? - click here
Monday, September 15, 2008
Superior Court 9/15/08 - COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. ADMIRAL PERRY
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. ADMIRAL PERRY
No. 2363 EDA 2007 2008 PA Super 212 Atlantic: n/a Filed: 9/15/2008
Appeal from the PCRA order entered July 19, 2007In the Court of Common Pleas of Delaware CountyCriminal No. CP-23-CR-0001239-2001
Before: MUSMANNO, BENDER, and FITZGERALD, JJ.
Opinion by: FITZGERALD, J.
Appellant, Admiral Perry, files this pro se appeal from the order entered in the Delaware Country Court of Common Pleas, denying his first petition filed under the Post Conviction Relief Act (PCRA). We find that the PCRA court erred in finding Appellant’s claims previously litigated, and that trial counsel had a reasonable basis for his failure to call the police sketch artist as a witness. Nonetheless, having found that no prejudice occurred, we affirm.
-----------------------------------------------------
Want 50 state & federal case law? - click here
No. 2363 EDA 2007 2008 PA Super 212 Atlantic: n/a Filed: 9/15/2008
Appeal from the PCRA order entered July 19, 2007In the Court of Common Pleas of Delaware CountyCriminal No. CP-23-CR-0001239-2001
Before: MUSMANNO, BENDER, and FITZGERALD, JJ.
Opinion by: FITZGERALD, J.
Appellant, Admiral Perry, files this pro se appeal from the order entered in the Delaware Country Court of Common Pleas, denying his first petition filed under the Post Conviction Relief Act (PCRA). We find that the PCRA court erred in finding Appellant’s claims previously litigated, and that trial counsel had a reasonable basis for his failure to call the police sketch artist as a witness. Nonetheless, having found that no prejudice occurred, we affirm.
-----------------------------------------------------
Want 50 state & federal case law? - click here
Friday, September 12, 2008
Superior Court 9/12/2008 - COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. LILI MARARITA WINGER
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. LILI MARARITA WINGER
No. 2003 MDA 2007 2008 PA Super 211 Atlantic: n/a Filed: 9/12/2008
Appeal from the Order entered October 31, 2007In the Court of Common Pleas of Centre CountyCriminal, No. CP-14-CR-0001508-2007
Before: GANTMAN, SHOGAN, AND KELLY, JJ.
Opinion by: GANTMAN, J.
Appellant, the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, asks us to determine whether the Centre County Court of Common Pleas erred when it granted habeas corpus relief and dismissed the charge, filed against Appellee, Lili Mararita Winger, of endangering the welfare of children. We hold the trial court erred when it dismissed the charge, because the Commonwealth produced probable cause to establish a prima facie case for that offense. Accordingly, we reverse and remand for further proceedings.
-----------------------------------------------------
Want 50 state & federal case law? - click here
No. 2003 MDA 2007 2008 PA Super 211 Atlantic: n/a Filed: 9/12/2008
Appeal from the Order entered October 31, 2007In the Court of Common Pleas of Centre CountyCriminal, No. CP-14-CR-0001508-2007
Before: GANTMAN, SHOGAN, AND KELLY, JJ.
Opinion by: GANTMAN, J.
Appellant, the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, asks us to determine whether the Centre County Court of Common Pleas erred when it granted habeas corpus relief and dismissed the charge, filed against Appellee, Lili Mararita Winger, of endangering the welfare of children. We hold the trial court erred when it dismissed the charge, because the Commonwealth produced probable cause to establish a prima facie case for that offense. Accordingly, we reverse and remand for further proceedings.
-----------------------------------------------------
Want 50 state & federal case law? - click here
Wednesday, September 10, 2008
Superior Court 9/10/2008 - COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. WENDELL LAMONT PARKER
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. WENDELL LAMONT PARKER
No. 1528 MDA 2007 2008 PA Super 208 Atlantic: n/a Filed: 9/10/2008
Appeal from the Judgment of Sentence Entered August 29, 2007In the Court of Common Pleas of York CountyCriminal at No(s): CP-67-CR-0001535-2007
Before: STEVENS, PANELLA and HUDOCK, JJ.
Opinion by: PANELLA, J.
Appellant, Wendell Lamont Parker, appeals from the judgment of sentence entered on August 29, 2007, by the Honorable John S. Kennedy, Court of Common Pleas of York County. After careful review, we affirm.
-----------------------------------------------------
Want 50 state & federal case law? - click here
On appeal, Parker raises the following issues for our review:
1. Whether the trial court erred in denying the
defendant’s Motion to Suppress when the evidence
used against him was seized following an unlawful
detention and an unlawful pat-down search of his
person that was not supported by probable cause or
reasonable suspicion of ongoing criminal activity nor
that the defendant was armed and dangerous, and
the search exceeded its permissible scope[?]
2. Whether the evidence was sufficient to support the
jury’s verdict finding the defendant guilty of Criminal
Attempt to Deliver a Noncontrolled Substance?
3. Whether the trial court erred in denying the
defendant’s Motion for Mistrial after the police officer
implied to the jury that the defendant had been
involved in prior criminal activity?
No. 1528 MDA 2007 2008 PA Super 208 Atlantic: n/a Filed: 9/10/2008
Appeal from the Judgment of Sentence Entered August 29, 2007In the Court of Common Pleas of York CountyCriminal at No(s): CP-67-CR-0001535-2007
Before: STEVENS, PANELLA and HUDOCK, JJ.
Opinion by: PANELLA, J.
Appellant, Wendell Lamont Parker, appeals from the judgment of sentence entered on August 29, 2007, by the Honorable John S. Kennedy, Court of Common Pleas of York County. After careful review, we affirm.
-----------------------------------------------------
Want 50 state & federal case law? - click here
On appeal, Parker raises the following issues for our review:
1. Whether the trial court erred in denying the
defendant’s Motion to Suppress when the evidence
used against him was seized following an unlawful
detention and an unlawful pat-down search of his
person that was not supported by probable cause or
reasonable suspicion of ongoing criminal activity nor
that the defendant was armed and dangerous, and
the search exceeded its permissible scope[?]
2. Whether the evidence was sufficient to support the
jury’s verdict finding the defendant guilty of Criminal
Attempt to Deliver a Noncontrolled Substance?
3. Whether the trial court erred in denying the
defendant’s Motion for Mistrial after the police officer
implied to the jury that the defendant had been
involved in prior criminal activity?
Superior Court 9/10/2008 - IN RE KK
IN RE: K.K., A MINORIN RE: K.K., A MINOR CHILDAPPEAL OF: K.K., A MINOR CHILDIN RE: K.K.APPEAL OF: K.K.
No. 1304, 1376 & 1377 WDA 2007 2008 PA Super 209 Atlantic: n/a Filed: 9/10/2008
Appeal from the Orders, June 13, 2007, July 12, 2007 and July 18, 2007in the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny CountyJuvenile Division at No. 2389-92, History No. 36027-C
Before: FORD ELLIOTT, P.J., MUSMANNO AND TAMILIA, JJ.
Opinion by: FORD ELLIOT, P.J.
Concurring and Dissenting Opinion by: TAMILIA, J.
In these consolidated appeals, K.K. (“appellant”), a minor, challenges (1) the order entered on June 13, 2007, issuing a warrant to locate appellant and detain him in the Shuman Juvenile Detention Center (“Shuman Center”); (2) the order entered on July 12, 2007, issuing a second warrant for appellant’s apprehension and detention in Shuman Center; and (3) the July 18, 2007 order adjudicating appellant dependent pursuant to 42 Pa.C.S.A. § 6302(6), and denying appellant’s request to release the July 12, 2007 warrant. After careful review, we dismiss the appeal from the June 13, 2007 order, vacate the July 12, 2007 order, and affirm the adjudication of dependency.
-----------------------------------------------------
Want 50 state & federal case law? - click here
No. 1304, 1376 & 1377 WDA 2007 2008 PA Super 209 Atlantic: n/a Filed: 9/10/2008
Appeal from the Orders, June 13, 2007, July 12, 2007 and July 18, 2007in the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny CountyJuvenile Division at No. 2389-92, History No. 36027-C
Before: FORD ELLIOTT, P.J., MUSMANNO AND TAMILIA, JJ.
Opinion by: FORD ELLIOT, P.J.
Concurring and Dissenting Opinion by: TAMILIA, J.
In these consolidated appeals, K.K. (“appellant”), a minor, challenges (1) the order entered on June 13, 2007, issuing a warrant to locate appellant and detain him in the Shuman Juvenile Detention Center (“Shuman Center”); (2) the order entered on July 12, 2007, issuing a second warrant for appellant’s apprehension and detention in Shuman Center; and (3) the July 18, 2007 order adjudicating appellant dependent pursuant to 42 Pa.C.S.A. § 6302(6), and denying appellant’s request to release the July 12, 2007 warrant. After careful review, we dismiss the appeal from the June 13, 2007 order, vacate the July 12, 2007 order, and affirm the adjudication of dependency.
-----------------------------------------------------
Want 50 state & federal case law? - click here
Superior Court 9/10/2008 - CONSOL PENNSYLVANIA COAL COMPANY v. THE FARMERS NATIONAL BANK OF CLAYSVILLE AND ....
CONSOL PENNSYLVANIA COAL COMPANY v. THE FARMERS NATIONAL BANK OF CLAYSVILLE AND JON HOLBERT CARTER AND PATRICIA W. CARTERAPPEAL OF: JON HOLBERT CARTER AND PATRICIA W. CARTER
No. 1360 WDA 2007 Atlantic: n/a Filed: 9/10/2008
Appeal from the Judgment entered July 6, 2007,in the Court of Common Pleas of Washington County,Civil, at No. 2005-2256.
Before: MUSMANNO, POPOVICH and HUDOCK, JJ.
Opinion by: HUDOCK, J.
This is an appeal from the Judgment entered in favor of Consol Pennsylvania Coal Company (Consol) and against Jon Holbert Carter and Patricia W. Carter, his wife (the Carters), in a quiet title action, wherein Consol was awarded fee simple title to the coal rights to a tract of land to which the Carters own the surface estate. For the reasons that follow, we reverse and remand for proceedings consistent with this opinion.
-----------------------------------------------------
Want 50 state & federal case law? - click here
No. 1360 WDA 2007 Atlantic: n/a Filed: 9/10/2008
Appeal from the Judgment entered July 6, 2007,in the Court of Common Pleas of Washington County,Civil, at No. 2005-2256.
Before: MUSMANNO, POPOVICH and HUDOCK, JJ.
Opinion by: HUDOCK, J.
This is an appeal from the Judgment entered in favor of Consol Pennsylvania Coal Company (Consol) and against Jon Holbert Carter and Patricia W. Carter, his wife (the Carters), in a quiet title action, wherein Consol was awarded fee simple title to the coal rights to a tract of land to which the Carters own the surface estate. For the reasons that follow, we reverse and remand for proceedings consistent with this opinion.
-----------------------------------------------------
Want 50 state & federal case law? - click here
Superior Court 9/10/08 - COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. CHARLES SALLEY
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. CHARLES SALLEY
No. 2305 EDA 2007 2008 PA Super 210 Atlantic: n/a Filed: 9/10/2008
Appeal from the Judgment of Sentence Entered August 17, 2007,Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County,Criminal Division, at No. CP-51-CR-0603851-2006.
Before: LALLY-GREEN, SHOGAN and HUDOCK, JJ.
Opinion by: SHOGAN, J.
Appellant, Charles Salley, appeals from the judgment of sentence entered on August 17, 2007, purporting to resentence Appellant. For the following reasons, we vacate and remand.
-----------------------------------------------------
Want 50 state & federal case law? - click here
Did not the trial court lack jurisdiction to re-sentence appellant [] where proper jurisdiction still rested with the Superior Court, where the certified record was still properly before the Superior Court, and where the trial court’s actions violated appellant’s statutory right to seek an Allowance of Appeal?
No. 2305 EDA 2007 2008 PA Super 210 Atlantic: n/a Filed: 9/10/2008
Appeal from the Judgment of Sentence Entered August 17, 2007,Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County,Criminal Division, at No. CP-51-CR-0603851-2006.
Before: LALLY-GREEN, SHOGAN and HUDOCK, JJ.
Opinion by: SHOGAN, J.
Appellant, Charles Salley, appeals from the judgment of sentence entered on August 17, 2007, purporting to resentence Appellant. For the following reasons, we vacate and remand.
-----------------------------------------------------
Want 50 state & federal case law? - click here
Did not the trial court lack jurisdiction to re-sentence appellant [] where proper jurisdiction still rested with the Superior Court, where the certified record was still properly before the Superior Court, and where the trial court’s actions violated appellant’s statutory right to seek an Allowance of Appeal?
Thursday, September 4, 2008
Superior Court 9/4/2008 - COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. LAWRENCE LEE
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. LAWRENCE LEE
No. 2239 EDA 2006 2008 PA Super 205 Atlantic: n/a Filed: 9/4/2008
Appeal from the Judgment of Sentence June 14, 2005 In the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County Criminal at No(s): CP#0205-1196
Before: PANELLA, HUDOCK, and FITZGERALD?, JJ
Opinion by: PANELLA, J.
Appellant, Lawrence Lee, appeals from the judgment of sentence entered on June 14, 2005, by the Honorable Rose Marie DeFino-Nastasi, Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County. After careful review, we affirm.
-----------------------------------------------------
Want 50 state & federal case law? - click here
Lee raises the following issues for our review:
A. WHETHER THE APPELLANT IS ENTITLED TO AN ARREST OF JUDGMENT ON THE CHARGE OF POSSESSION WITH INTENT TO DELIVER WHERE THE COMMONWEALTH FAILED TO PROVE EACH ELEMENT OF THE CRIME BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT – SPECIFICALLY, WHERE THE COMMONWEALTH FAILED TO ESTABLISH INTENT TO DELIVER?
B. WHETHER THE LEARNED TRIAL COURT ERRED BY DENYING THE APPELLANT’S CARROLL MOTION – SPECIFICALLY, BECAUSE THE FACTS INTRODUCED DURING THE MOTION ESTABLISHED BY A PREPONDERANCE OF THE EVIDENCE THAT THE APPELLANT WAS A HEAVY DRUG USER, THERE WAS NO SEPARATION OF DRUGS AS TO WHAT WOULD BE FOR PERSONAL USE OR DISTRIBUTION, AND AN EXPERT TESTIFIED THAT THE APPELLANT HAD THE NECESSARY DRUG HABIT THAT COULD BRING THE DRUGS FOUND BENEATH THE TWO-GRAM MANDATORY MINIMUM?
No. 2239 EDA 2006 2008 PA Super 205 Atlantic: n/a Filed: 9/4/2008
Appeal from the Judgment of Sentence June 14, 2005 In the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County Criminal at No(s): CP#0205-1196
Before: PANELLA, HUDOCK, and FITZGERALD?, JJ
Opinion by: PANELLA, J.
Appellant, Lawrence Lee, appeals from the judgment of sentence entered on June 14, 2005, by the Honorable Rose Marie DeFino-Nastasi, Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County. After careful review, we affirm.
-----------------------------------------------------
Want 50 state & federal case law? - click here
Lee raises the following issues for our review:
A. WHETHER THE APPELLANT IS ENTITLED TO AN ARREST OF JUDGMENT ON THE CHARGE OF POSSESSION WITH INTENT TO DELIVER WHERE THE COMMONWEALTH FAILED TO PROVE EACH ELEMENT OF THE CRIME BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT – SPECIFICALLY, WHERE THE COMMONWEALTH FAILED TO ESTABLISH INTENT TO DELIVER?
B. WHETHER THE LEARNED TRIAL COURT ERRED BY DENYING THE APPELLANT’S CARROLL MOTION – SPECIFICALLY, BECAUSE THE FACTS INTRODUCED DURING THE MOTION ESTABLISHED BY A PREPONDERANCE OF THE EVIDENCE THAT THE APPELLANT WAS A HEAVY DRUG USER, THERE WAS NO SEPARATION OF DRUGS AS TO WHAT WOULD BE FOR PERSONAL USE OR DISTRIBUTION, AND AN EXPERT TESTIFIED THAT THE APPELLANT HAD THE NECESSARY DRUG HABIT THAT COULD BRING THE DRUGS FOUND BENEATH THE TWO-GRAM MANDATORY MINIMUM?
Superior Court 9/4/2008 - BARBARA LICHTMAN TAYAR v. CAMELBACK SKI CORPORATION, INC. and BRIAN MONAGHAN
BARBARA LICHTMAN TAYAR v. CAMELBACK SKI CORPORATION, INC. and BRIAN MONAGHAN
No. 1160 EDA 2006 2008 PA Super 204 Atlantic: n/a Filed: 9/4/2008
Appeal from the Order Entered March 31, 2006 In the Court of Common Pleas of Monroe County Civil Division at No(s): 135 Civil 2005
Before: FORD ELLIOTT, PJ., STEVENS, ORIE MELVIN, BENDER, BOWES, GANTMAN, PANELLA, DONOHUE and ALLEN, JJ.
Opinion by: PANELLA, J.
Dissenting Opinion by: BOWES, J.
This case once again raises issues concerning the enforceability of releases relating to recreational activities provided by commercial entities. Appellant, Barbara Lichtman Tayar, appeals from the order entered on March 31, 2006, in the Court of Common Pleas of Monroe County, that granted the motion for summary judgment filed by Appellees, Camelback Ski Corporation, Inc. and Brian Monaghan.
-----------------------------------------------------
Want 50 state & federal case law? - click here
No. 1160 EDA 2006 2008 PA Super 204 Atlantic: n/a Filed: 9/4/2008
Appeal from the Order Entered March 31, 2006 In the Court of Common Pleas of Monroe County Civil Division at No(s): 135 Civil 2005
Before: FORD ELLIOTT, PJ., STEVENS, ORIE MELVIN, BENDER, BOWES, GANTMAN, PANELLA, DONOHUE and ALLEN, JJ.
Opinion by: PANELLA, J.
Dissenting Opinion by: BOWES, J.
This case once again raises issues concerning the enforceability of releases relating to recreational activities provided by commercial entities. Appellant, Barbara Lichtman Tayar, appeals from the order entered on March 31, 2006, in the Court of Common Pleas of Monroe County, that granted the motion for summary judgment filed by Appellees, Camelback Ski Corporation, Inc. and Brian Monaghan.
-----------------------------------------------------
Want 50 state & federal case law? - click here
Superior Court 9/4/2008 - COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. CORY SMITH
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. CORY SMITH
No. 1120 MDA 2006 2008 PA Super 206 Atlantic: n/a Filed: 9/4/2008
Appeal from the Judgment of Sentence entered on January 4, 2006, in the Court of Common Pleas of Lancaster County, Criminal Division, at No. CP-36-CR-0000312-2004
Before: FORD ELLIOTT, P.J., STEVENS, ORIE MELVIN, LALLY-GREEN, KLEIN, BENDER, BOWES, GANTMAN, and SHOGAN, JJ.
Opinion by: LALLY-GREEN, J.
Concurring Statement by: KLEIN, J.
Appellant, Cory Smith, appeals from the judgment of sentence entered on January 4, 2006. We affirm in part, vacate in part, and remand.
-----------------------------------------------------
Want 50 state & federal case law? - click here
No. 1120 MDA 2006 2008 PA Super 206 Atlantic: n/a Filed: 9/4/2008
Appeal from the Judgment of Sentence entered on January 4, 2006, in the Court of Common Pleas of Lancaster County, Criminal Division, at No. CP-36-CR-0000312-2004
Before: FORD ELLIOTT, P.J., STEVENS, ORIE MELVIN, LALLY-GREEN, KLEIN, BENDER, BOWES, GANTMAN, and SHOGAN, JJ.
Opinion by: LALLY-GREEN, J.
Concurring Statement by: KLEIN, J.
Appellant, Cory Smith, appeals from the judgment of sentence entered on January 4, 2006. We affirm in part, vacate in part, and remand.
-----------------------------------------------------
Want 50 state & federal case law? - click here
Tuesday, September 2, 2008
Superior Court 9/2/08 - JOYCE A. SCHMIDT, Adminisratrix of the Estate of Erin D. Schmidt, deceased; JOYCE A. SCHMIDT, in her own right; And...
JOYCE A. SCHMIDT, Adminisratrix of the Estate of Erin D. Schmidt, deceased; JOYCE A. SCHMIDT, in her own right; And LINDSAY SCHMIDT, a minor, by her Mother and natural guardian, JOYCE A. SCHMIDT v. BOARDMAN COMPANY, a division of TBC FABRICATION, INC.; BOARDMAN, INC.; TBC FABRICATION, INC.; CORAOPOLIS VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT; SINOR MANUFACTURING, INC., n/k/a FREIGHTLINER SPECIALTY VEHICLES, INC., and PETER JEFFRESS and MICHELE JEFFRESS, Individually and on behalf of Their minor Daughters, JOEYLYNNE JEFFRESS and LAUREN JEFFRESS, v. CORAOPOLIS VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT; BOARDMAN COMPANY, A division of TBC FABRICATION, INC.; BOARDMAN, INC.; SINOR MANUFACTURING, INC.; and FREIGHTLINER SPECIALTY VEHICLES, INC.APPEAL OF: SINOR MANUFACTURING, INC., n/k/a FREIGHTLINER SPECIALTY VEHICLES, INC., and FREIGHTLINER SPECIALTY VEHICLES, INC.
No. 905 WDA 2007 2008 PA Super 203 Atlantic: n/a Filed: 9/2/2008
Appeal from the Judgment Entered April 23, 2007,Court of Common Pleas, Allegheny County,Civil, at No. G.D. 05-7191
Before: ORIE MELVIN, BENDER and ALLEN, JJ.
Opinion by: ALLEN, J.
Concurring and Dissenting Opinion by: ORIE MELVIN, J.
Sinor Manufacturing, Inc., n/k/a Freightliner Specialty Vehicles, Inc. and Freightliner Specialty Vehicles, Inc. (collectively “Appellants”) appeal from the judgment entered against them and in favor of various plaintiffs on their claims of strict product liability and infliction of emotional distress.
-----------------------------------------------------
Want 50 state & federal case law? - click here
No. 905 WDA 2007 2008 PA Super 203 Atlantic: n/a Filed: 9/2/2008
Appeal from the Judgment Entered April 23, 2007,Court of Common Pleas, Allegheny County,Civil, at No. G.D. 05-7191
Before: ORIE MELVIN, BENDER and ALLEN, JJ.
Opinion by: ALLEN, J.
Concurring and Dissenting Opinion by: ORIE MELVIN, J.
Sinor Manufacturing, Inc., n/k/a Freightliner Specialty Vehicles, Inc. and Freightliner Specialty Vehicles, Inc. (collectively “Appellants”) appeal from the judgment entered against them and in favor of various plaintiffs on their claims of strict product liability and infliction of emotional distress.
-----------------------------------------------------
Want 50 state & federal case law? - click here
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
