Superior Court - LOUIS and ALISON WALKER, Individually and as husband and wife, v. DREXEL UNIVERSITY

LOUIS and ALISON WALKER, Individually and as husband and wife, v. DREXEL UNIVERSITY No. 3353 EDA 2007 2009 PA Super 80 Atlantic: 971 A.2d 521 Filed: 4/27/2009
	Appeal form the Judgment Entered November 19, 2007 In the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County Civil at No(s): October Term, 2005 No. 004355
Before: BOWES, PANELLA, JJ., and McEWEN, P.J.E.
Opinion by: PANELLA, J.
Appellant, Drexel University (“Drexel”), appeals from the judgment entered on November 19, 2007, by the Honorable Matthew D. Carrafiello, Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County, following the denial of Drexel’s motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict (JNOV). After careful review, we affirm.

-----------------------------------------------------
Want 50 state & federal case law? - click here

Superior Court - TRANSCORE, LP, F/K/A TRANSCORE, INC., TRANSCORE HOLDINGS, INC., AND AMTECH SYSTEMS, LLC, F/K/A AMTECH SYSTEMS CORPORATION v. CALIBER

TRANSCORE, LP, F/K/A TRANSCORE, INC., TRANSCORE HOLDINGS, INC., AND AMTECH SYSTEMS, LLC, F/K/A AMTECH SYSTEMS CORPORATION v. CALIBER ONE INDEMNITY COMPANY, PMA REINSURANCE CORPORATION AND PMA CAPITAL CORPORATION No. 3352 EDA 2007 2009 PA Super 81 Atlantic: 972 A.2d 1205 Petition for Reargument Denied 6/30/2009 Filed: 4/27/2009
	Appeal from the Judgment entered November 5, 2007 in the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County, Civil, No. 002657 October Term, 2005
Before: KLEIN, SHOGAN, JJ. and McEWEN, P.J.E.
Opinion by: KLEIN, J.
In this declaratory judgment action, Caliber One Indemnity Company (Caliber) appeals from the judgment ordering it to reimburse TransCore, LP, F/K/A TransCore, Inc., TransCore Holdings, Inc, and Amtech Systems, LLC, F/K/A Amtech Systems Corporation (Amtech) $822,981.95 for legal fees Amtech incurred in defending itself against a patent infringement claim brought not by a customer, but by another vendor. The insurance policy issued by Caliber covered, in relevant part, professional liability. For two reasons, we reverse and direct that judgment be entered in Caliber’s favor. First, because we find that a patent infringement action brought by another vendor is not a “professional liability” action under the terms of the policy. Second, this is an action for inducing a third party to violate a patent, not a direct patent infringement action. Because that patent action can only be brought if the violation is knowing, and there is an exclusion in the police for “knowing” actions, there is no coverage for this action.

-----------------------------------------------------
Want 50 state & federal case law? - click here

Superior Court - ROBERT ARCHIBALD AND KRISTA ARCHIBALD v.CODY KEMBLE

ROBERT ARCHIBALD AND KRISTA ARCHIBALD v.CODY KEMBLE No. 2163 MDA 2007 2009 PA Super 79 Atlantic: 971 A.2d 513 Filed: 4/23/2009
	Appeal from the Order entered December 7, 2007 In the Court of Common Pleas of Dauphin County Civil Division, at No. 2005-CV-2079-CV
Before: PANELLA, CLELAND, JJ. and MCEWEN, P.J.E.
Opinion by: CLELAND, J.
Appellants, Robert and Krista Archibald (Archibald or Archibalds), appeal the December 6, 2007 Order granting Appellee Cody Kemble’s (Kemble) Motion for Summary Judgment. The crux of this case is the standard of care to be applied when a player in an adult “no-check” ice hockey league checks and injures another player in violation of the league rules. Because we conclude the applicable standard of care is recklessness and because the Archibalds were not required to specifically plead recklessness in their Complaint and because they produced evidence of recklessness in their discovery, we vacate and remand.

-----------------------------------------------------
Want 50 state & federal case law? - click here

Superior Court - COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. SAMUEL E. HARRIS

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. SAMUEL E. HARRIS No. 634 MDA 2007 2009 PA Super 78 Atlantic: 972 A.2d 1196 Filed: 4/22/2009
	Appeal from the Order Entered March 30, 2007, in the Court of Common Pleas of Lancaster County Criminal Division at No. CP-36-CR-0002649-2001
Before: FORD ELLIOTT, P.J., DONOHUE AND POPOVICH, JJ.
Opinion by: FORD ELLIOT, P.J.
The Commonwealth appeals the March 30, 2007 order granting Samuel Harris’s (“appellee’s”) petition filed pursuant to the Post Conviction Relief Act (“PCRA”), 42 Pa.C.S.A. §§ 9541-9546. The PCRA court determined that appellee had received ineffective assistance of counsel when his attorney failed to file a motion to suppress his statements to the police following his arrest. After careful review, we reverse the order of the PCRA court.

-----------------------------------------------------
Want 50 state & federal case law? - click here

Superior Court - COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. KENNETH STEPHEN PRYSOCK

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. KENNETH STEPHEN PRYSOCK No. 420 WDA 2008 2009 PA Super 76 Atlantic: 972 A.2d 539 Filed: 4/21/2009
	Appeal from the Judgment of Sentence January 29, 2008, In the Court of Common Pleas of ALLEGHENY County, Criminal at No(s): CC 200703322
Before: BOWES, FREEDBERG, and FITZGERALD, JJ.
Opinion by: FREEDBERG, J.
Appellant, Kenneth Prysock, appeals from the judgment of sentence entered on January 29, 2008, in the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County. For the reasons discussed below, we vacate the judgment of sentence and remand for a new trial.

-----------------------------------------------------
Want 50 state & federal case law? - click here

Superior Court - COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. BEREIM LAWRENCE DORM

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. BEREIM LAWRENCE DORM No. 993 MDA 2009 2009 PA Super 77 Atlantic: 971 A.2d 1284 Filed: 4/21/2009
	Appeal from the Order of May 19, 2008, in the Court of Common Pleas of York County, Criminal Division, at No. CP-67-CR-0003734-2007.
Before: FORD ELLIOTT, P.J., MUSMANNO and COLVILLE, JJ.
Opinion by: COLVILLE, J.
The Commonwealth appeals the order granting Bereim Dorm (“Dorm”) a new trial. The trial court issued the aforesaid order after finding that confusing jury instructions and an incorrect verdict slip produced an uncertainty as to which offense Dorm was convicted of committing at a certain count, prevented the court from knowing what sentencing provisions applied to Dorm, and/or otherwise resulted in an unfair trial process. As explained more fully infra, the Commonwealth claims the court erred because Dorm waived any objection to the jury instructions and because those instructions were correct as a matter of law. We affirm in part, vacate in part and remand for a new trial.

-----------------------------------------------------
Want 50 state & federal case law? - click here

Superior Court - IN RE: ESTATE OF PAUL J. SAUERS, III, DECEASED APPEAL OF JODIE L. SAUERS

IN RE: ESTATE OF PAUL J. SAUERS, III, DECEASED APPEAL OF JODIE L. SAUERS No. 1060 MDA 2008 2009 PA Super 75 Atlantic: 971 A.2d 1265 Filed: 4/17/2009
	Appeal from the Order entered May 16, 2007, In the Court of Common Pleas of York County, Orphans, at No(s): 67-06-01327
Before: STEVENS, MUSMANNO, KLEIN, BENDER, BOWES, GANTMAN, SHOGAN, FREEDBERG and CLELAND, JJ.
Opinion by: FREEDBERG, J.
Concurring and Dissenting Opinion by: BOWES, J.
This matter is before the Court on an appeal from the order entered in the Court of Common Pleas for York County directing Jodie L. Sauers (“Appellant”) to surrender all of the life insurance proceeds which she received following the death of her former husband. We affirm.

-----------------------------------------------------
Want 50 state & federal case law? - click here

Superior Court - COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. PAUL R. WEAKLEY COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. HUGO M. SELENSKI

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. PAUL R. WEAKLEY COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. HUGO M. SELENSKI No. 1052 and 1054 MDA 2007 2009 PA Super 74 Atlantic: 972 A.2d 1182 Filed: 4/17/2009
	Appeal from the Order entered May 17, 2007 In the Court of Common Pleas of Luzerne County Criminal at No(s): CP-40-CR-0002701-2006 and CP-40-CR-0002700-2006
Before: STEVENS, LALLY-GREEN, and FITZGERALD, JJ.
Opinion by: STEVENS, J.
Dissenting Opinion by: FITZGERALD, J.
The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania files this consolidated appeal from the pre-trial order entered in the Luzerne County Court of Common Pleas, which granted defense motions in limine by Appellees Paul R. Weakley (“Weakley”) and Hugo M. Selenski (“Selenski”) to exclude evidence of subsequent other crimes from admission at their criminal homicide trial. Because we find the other crime so distinctive in its manner of execution and so similar to the charged crime as to be admissible for the purpose of showing identity, we reverse.

-----------------------------------------------------
Want 50 state & federal case law? - click here

Superior Court - MARTON MINTO v. J.B. HUNT TRANSPORT, INC. MARTON MINTO v. J.B. HUNT TRANSPORT SERVICES, INC., AND J.B. HUNT TRANSPORT, INC.

MARTON MINTO v. J.B. HUNT TRANSPORT, INC. MARTON MINTO v. J.B. HUNT TRANSPORT SERVICES, INC., AND J.B. HUNT TRANSPORT, INC. No. 43 EDA 2008 2009 PA Super 73 Atlantic: 971 A.2d 1280 Filed: 4/17/2009
	Appeal from the Order entered December 6, 2007 in the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County, Civil, No. 03528 April Term, 2003, No. 1029 October Term, 2003
Before: LALLY-GREEN, KLEIN and GANTMAN, JJ.
Opinion by: KLEIN, J.
Concurring Opinion by: GANTMAN, J.
Marton Minto suffered catastrophic injuries including quadriplegia when a truck he was driving, in his role as an employee of J.B. Hunt Transport, Inc., went off the road on Interstate I-95 in Pennsylvania south of Philadelphia. In his complaint, Minto alleged that because his employer, J.B. Hunt, negligently destroyed and failed to preserve key parts of the truck, including the seatbelts, the brakes themselves, “black boxes” that monitored the action of the anti-lock brakes and motor, and other items, he was prejudiced in his tort suit against third parties who manufactured the truck and its components. The trial court judge granted J.B. Hunt’s judgment on the pleadings, finding that all of Minto’s claims against J.B. Hunt were barred by the exclusivity provision of the Workers’ Compensation Act (“Act”), 77 P.S. § 481(a).

-----------------------------------------------------
Want 50 state & federal case law? - click here

Superior Court - DOROTHY J. TURNER, Executrix of the Estate of Roberta Wismer v. VALLEY HOUSING DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION

DOROTHY J. TURNER, Executrix of the Estate of Roberta Wismer v. VALLEY HOUSING DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION No. 543 EDA 2007 2009 PA Super 72 Atlantic: 972 A.2d 531 Petition for Reargument Denied 6/23/2009 Filed: 4/16/2009
	Appeal from the Order entered on February 14, 2007 in the Court of Common Pleas of Northampton County, Civil Division, No. C-0048-V-2003-006486
Before: STEVENS, MUSMANNO and BENDER, JJ.
Opinion by: MUSMANNO, J.
Dorothy J. Turner (“Turner”) appeals from the Order that denied Turner’s Motion in limine, granted the Motion of Valley Housing Development Corporation (“Valley”) to strike third party statements in medical records, and granted Valley’s Motion for summary judgment. For the reasons stated herein, we affirm in part and reverse in part.

-----------------------------------------------------
Want 50 state & federal case law? - click here

Superior Court - HERBERT L. DALEY AND EVELYN DALEY, H/W vs. A.W. CHESTERTON, INC. AND U.S. SUPPLY COMPANY AND DURO-DYNE CORPORATION

HERBERT L. DALEY AND EVELYN DALEY, H/W vs. A.W. CHESTERTON, INC. AND U.S. SUPPLY COMPANY AND DURO-DYNE CORPORATION No. 2763 EDA 2006 2009 PA Super 71 Atlantic: 971 A.2d 1258 Petition for Reargument Denied 6/19/2009 Filed: 4/15/2009
	Appeal from the Order dated September 12, 2006 In the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County Civil, October Term, 2005, No. 2640
Before: MUSMANNO, GANTMAN, AND PANELLA, JJ.
Opinion by: GANTMAN, J.
Herbert L. Daley and Evelyn Daley, h/w, (collectively “Appellant”) ask us to determine whether the trial court erred when it granted summary judgment in favor of Appellees, A.W. Chesterton Inc., U.S. Supply Company, and Duro-Dyne Corporation, and dismissed Appellant’s complaint with prejudice, based on the court’s interpretation of Marinari v. Asbestos Corp., Ltd., 612 A.2d 1021, 1028 (Pa.Super. 1992) (en banc). We hold the trial court misapplied the law in granting summary judgment in favor of Appellees based on the court’s unduly restrictive interpretation of the separate disease rule in Marinari. Accordingly, we vacate the order granting summary judgment in favor of Appellees and remand the case to the trial court for further proceedings.

-----------------------------------------------------
Want 50 state & federal case law? - click here

Superior Court - BARBARA J. GUNN v. THE AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY OF HARTFORD, CONNECTICUT

BARBARA J. GUNN v. THE AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY OF HARTFORD, CONNECTICUT No. 1345 WDA 2008 2009 PA Super 70 Atlantic: n/a Filed: 4/15/2009
	Appeal from the Order entered July 25, 2008, in the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County, Pennsylvania Civil at No. GD-07-002888
Before: FORD ELLIOTT, P.J., LALLY-GREEN, and ALLEN, JJ.
Opinion by: ALLEN, J.
Dissenting Opinion by: LALLY-GREEN, J.
Appellant, the Automobile Insurance Company of Hartford, Connecticut (“Appellant”) appeals from the judgment entered in favor of Appellee, Barbara Gunn (“Gunn”) following the trial court’s denial of Appellant’s motion to sever and stay a statutory bad faith claim. The instant matter arises out of a two-count complaint filed by Gunn against Appellant. Gunn’s first count is a breach of contract claim (“UIM claim”) against Appellant, her insurance carrier, for failure to pay underinsurance motorist (UIM) benefits. The second count is a bad faith claim alleging that Appellant failed to act on Gunn’s claim for underinsured motorist benefits in good faith, in violation of 42 Pa.C.S. § 8371.

-----------------------------------------------------
Want 50 state & federal case law? - click here

Superior Court - COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. DWAYNE BROWN

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. DWAYNE BROWN No. 1053 MDA 2008 2009 PA Super 69 Atlantic: 972 A.2d 529 Filed: 4/15/2009
	Appeal from the PCRA Order of June 4, 2008 in the Court of Common Pleas of Dauphin County, Criminal Nos. CP-22-CR-0002685-2006, CP-22-CR-0004452-2006
Before: STEVENS, KLEIN and KELLY, JJ.
Opinion by: KLEIN, J.
Dwayne Brown appeals pro se from the trial court’s order dismissing, without a hearing, his petition filed pursuant to the Post Conviction Relief Act (PCRA), 42 Pa.C.S.A. § 9541-9546. On appeal Brown claims ineffectiveness of counsel due to a conflict of interest arising from trial counsel’s dual representation of him and his co-defendant. Because Brown has set forth facts which show the potential for harm as a result of counsel’s dual representation, we reverse and remand for a hearing on his petition.

---

-----------------------------------------------------
Want 50 state & federal case law? - click here

Superior Court - JEFFREY W. FRANTZ v. CAROL ANN FRANTZ APPEAL OF: PAUL J. McARDLE

JEFFREY W. FRANTZ v. CAROL ANN FRANTZ APPEAL OF: PAUL J. McARDLE No. 567 WDA 2008 2009 PA Super 68 Atlantic: 972 A.2d 525 Filed: 4/14/2009
	Appeal from the Order of March 25, 2008, in the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County, Civil Division at No. FD 07 7499-002
Before: MUSMANNO, SHOGAN and COLVILLE, JJ.
Opinion by: COLVILLE, J.
Paul J. McArdle, Esq. (“Appellant”) appeals the order striking his judgment lien that he claims had attached to certain realty. The trial court struck the lien because the court found the realty was held under the jurisdiction of the court during certain divorce proceedings and, being under the court’s jurisdiction, the realty could not be attached by a lien such as Appellant’s. The court’s reasoning was based primarily on Klebach v. Mellon Bank, N.A., 565 A.2d 448 (Pa. Super. 1989), discussed more fully infra. Appellant, however, claims the court was without authority to strike the lien because it attached by operation of law as a combined result of 23 Pa.C.S.A. § 3507(a) (division of entireties property between divorced persons), 42 Pa.C.S.A. § 4303(a) (effect of judgments and orders as liens), and Pa.R.C.P. 3023 (judgment, lien, duration). Primarily, he claims Pa.R.C.P. 3023 essentially abrogated Klebach. We affirm the order.

-----------------------------------------------------
Want 50 state & federal case law? - click here

Superior Court - COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. ANDRE EDWARD BASKING

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. ANDRE EDWARD BASKING No. 1129 WDA 2007 2009 PA Super 67 Atlantic: 970 A.2d 1181 Filed: 4/14/2009
	Appeal from the Order Entered May 17, 2007, In the Court of Common Pleas, Allegheny County, Criminal, at No. CC 200517437
Before: FORD ELLIOTT, P.J., LALLY-GREEN and ALLEN, JJ.
Opinion by: ALLEN, J.
In this case, we are asked to explore the contours of the common authority and apparent authority doctrines, which are corollaries to the consent exception to the warrant requirement. Additionally, this Court must decide if the apparent authority exception, if adopted and applied to the citizens of this Commonwealth, violates the strong notion of privacy inherent in Article I, Section 8 of the Pennsylvania Constitution.

-----------------------------------------------------
Want 50 state & federal case law? - click here

Superior Court - COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. STEPHEN J. PARSONS

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. STEPHEN J. PARSONS No. 615 MDA 2006 2009 PA Super 66 Atlantic: 969 A.2d 1259 Filed: 4/9/2009
	Appeal from the Judgment of Sentence April 4, 2006 In the Court of Common Pleas of Berks County Criminal, No. CP 06 CR 3312 - 2004
Before: FORD ELLIOTT, P.J., STEVENS, ORIE MELVIN, BENDER, BOWES, GANTMAN, PANELLA, DONOHUE, AND ALLEN, JJ.
Opinion by: GANTMAN, J.
Dissenting Opinion by: BENDER, J.
Appellant, the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, asks us to determine whether the trial court erred when it sentenced Appellee, Stephen A. Parsons, to three (3) months of electronic monitoring under the supervision of the Berks County Probation Office, followed by a five-year term of probation, in violation of the parties’ plea agreement that called for a greater sentence. After careful review of the certified record as well as the relevant, settled law pertaining to plea agreements, we hold the court erred when it allowed Appellee to lodge an untimely challenge to the sentencing term of the plea agreement, and when the court set aside the sentencing term, without the Commonwealth’s consent, despite the clarity of the plea agreement both as to the charges and the specific sentence, which the court had previously accepted. Accordingly, we vacate the judgment of sentence and remand for imposition of the sentence contained in the parties’ plea bargain.

-----------------------------------------------------
Want 50 state & federal case law? - click here

Superior Court - COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. MARVIN JAMINE ROBINSON

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. MARVIN JAMINE ROBINSON No. 657 MDA 2007 2009 PA Super 65 Atlantic: 970 A.2d 455 Filed: 4/9/2009
	Appeal from the Order of February 21, 2007, in the Court of Common Pleas of Dauphin County, Criminal Division, at No. CP-22-CR-0001420-2001.
Before: STEVENS, MUSMANNO, KLEIN, BENDER, BOWES, GANTMAN, SHOGAN, FREEDBERG, and CLELAND, JJ.
Opinion by: BOWES, J.
The issue presented in this case is whether we should remand for a hearing pursuant to Commonwealth v. Grazier, 713 A.2d 81 (Pa. 1998). We hold that in any case where a defendant seeks self-representation in a PCRA proceeding and where counsel has not properly withdrawn, a hearing must be held. In doing so, we overrule Commonwealth v. Murray, 836 A.2d 956 (Pa.Super. 2003), to the extent that it indicates that such a hearing is unnecessary. We hereby vacate the denial of PCRA relief and remand.

-----------------------------------------------------
Want 50 state & federal case law? - click here

Superior Court - COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. GARY L. KRETCHMAR

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. GARY L. KRETCHMAR No. 2284 EDA 2008 2009 PA Super 63 Atlantic: 971 A.2d 1249 Petition for Reargument Denied 6/9/2009 Filed: 4/8/2009
	Appeal from the PCRA Order, July 15, 2008, in the Court of Common Pleas of Bucks County Criminal Division at No. CP-09-CR-0001190-1987
Before: FORD ELLIOTT, P.J., STEVENS AND KELLY, JJ.
Opinion by: FORD ELLIOT, P.J.
This is an appeal from an order dismissing without a hearing a petition filed under the Post-Conviction Relief Act (“PCRA”), 42 Pa.C.S.A.§§ 9541-9546, by appellant, Gary L. Kretchmar. We affirm.

-----------------------------------------------------
Want 50 state & federal case law? - click here

Superior Court - COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. SHAWN M. FICKES

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. SHAWN M. FICKES No. 1273 MDA 2008 2009 PA Super 64 Atlantic: 969 A.2d 1251 Filed: 4/8/2009
	Appeal from the Judgment of Sentence June 18, 2008 In the Court of Common Pleas of York County Criminal Division at No. CP-67-CR-0007501-2007
Before: MUSMANNO, BENDER and CLELAND, JJ.
Opinion by: BENDER, J.
Shawn M. Fickes (Appellant) appeals from the judgment of sentence entered following his conviction for DUI. Appellant claims that the trial court erred in denying his motion to suppress. For the reasons that follow, we affirm.

-----------------------------------------------------
Want 50 state & federal case law? - click here

Superior Court - COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. WILLIAM C. BIBBS

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. WILLIAM C. BIBBS No. 1229 MDA 2008 2009 PA Super 62 Atlantic: 970 A.2d 440 Filed: 4/7/2009
	Appeal from the Judgment of Sentence January 2, 2007 In the Court of Common Pleas of Berks County Criminal Division at No. CP-06-CR-0000814-2006
Before: MUSMANNO, BENDER and CLELAND, JJ.
Opinion by: BENDER, J.
William C. Bibbs appeals from the January 2, 2007 judgment of sentence of an aggregate of fourteen to thirty years’ incarceration imposed following his convictions for robbery (18 Pa.C.S. § 3701(a)(1)(i)), conspiracy to commit robbery (18 Pa.C.S. § 903(a)(1)), two counts of aggravated assault (18 Pa.C.S. § 2702(a)(1), (4)), two counts of conspiracy to commit aggravated assault (18 Pa.C.S. § 903(a)(1)), firearms not to be carried without a license (18 Pa.C.S. § 6106(a)(1)), conspiracy to commit firearms not to be carried without a license (18 Pa.C.S. §903(a)(1)), possession of an instrument of crime (18 Pa.C.S. § 907(a)), and conspiracy to commit possession of an instrument of crime (18 Pa.C.S. § 903(a)(1)). We affirm.

-----------------------------------------------------
Want 50 state & federal case law? - click here

Superior Court - COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. LEON PARHAM

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. LEON PARHAM No. 1409 WDA 2007 2009 PA Super 61 Atlantic: 969 A.2d 629 Filed: 4/3/2009
	Appeal from the Judgment of Sentence March 12, 2008 In the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County Criminal at No(s): CP-02-CR-0014431-2005
Before: STEVENS, MUSMANNO, and CLELAND, JJ.
Opinion by: STEVENS, J.
This is an appeal from the judgment of sentence entered by the Court of Common Peas of Allegheny County on March 12, 2008, following Appellant’s conviction by a jury of rape, rape of a child, statutory sexual assault, and corruption of minors. Herein, Appellant contends that the crimes of rape and statutory sexual assault should have merged for purposes of sentencing. We affirm the judgment of sentence.

-----------------------------------------------------
Want 50 state & federal case law? - click here

Superior Court - DERRICK R. CRAMER, SR. v. JERI ANN ZGELA

DERRICK R. CRAMER, SR. v. JERI ANN ZGELA No. 1250 MDA 2008 2009 PA Super 60 Atlantic: 969 A.2d 621 Filed: 4/1/2009
	Appeal from the Order Entered June 26, 2008 In the Court of Common Pleas of York County Civil Division at No. 2004-FC-00354-Y03
Before: MUSMANNO, BENDER and CLELAND, JJ.
Opinion by: BENDER, J.
Derrick R. Cramer, Sr. (Appellant) appeals pro se from the order dated June 26, 2008, that denied his request for visitation with his minor son (D.O.B. 3/30/01) at SCI–Huntingdon, where Appellant is serving a life sentence for first degree murder. We vacate and remand.

-----------------------------------------------------
Want 50 state & federal case law? - click here

Superior Court - MARK L. HELPIN v. TRUSTEES OF THE UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA, MARJORIE JEFFCOAT, THOMAS FREITAG AND LAWRENCE M. LEVIN APPEAL OF:

MARK L. HELPIN v. TRUSTEES OF THE UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA, MARJORIE JEFFCOAT, THOMAS FREITAG AND LAWRENCE M. LEVIN APPEAL OF: TRUSTEES OF THE UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA MARK L. HELPIN v. TRUSTEES OF THE UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA, MARJORIE JEFFCOAT, IN HER INDIVIDUAL AND OFFICIAL CAPACITIES, THOMAS FREITAG, IN HIS OFFICIAL AND PERSONAL CAPACITY AND LAWRENCE M. LEVIN, IN HIS OFFICIAL AND PERSONAL CAPACITIES No. 125 and 307 EDA 2008 2009 PA Super 58 Atlantic: 969 A.2d 601 Filed: 4/1/2009
	Appeal from the Order Entered December 13, 2007 In the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County Civil Division at No. No. 00702 September Term, 2005
Before: BENDER, PANELLA and KELLY, JJ.
Opinion by: BENDER, J.
The Trustees of the University of Pennsylvania, Marjorie Jeffcoat, in her Individual and Official Capacities, Thomas Freitag, in his Official and Personal Capacities, and Lawrence M. Levin, in his Official and Personal Capacities (collectively “Penn”), appeal the judgment entered in favor of Mark L. Helpin (Dr. Helpin) on his claims of breach of contract and constructive discharge after removal from his position as director of the pediatric dental clinic operated by the University at the Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia (CHOP). Dr. Helpin cross-appeals, contending that the trial court erred in declining to award pre-judgment interest on the award in question, some $4,040,000. Following careful considerations of the parties’ respective arguments, we find that neither demonstrated reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

-----------------------------------------------------
Want 50 state & federal case law? - click here