COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. WENDY COLLEEN KNELLER

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. WENDY COLLEEN KNELLER No. 1016 EDA 2007 2010 PA Super 122 Atlantic: n/a Filed: 7/14/2010
	Appeal from the Judgment of Sentence October 23, 2006 In the Court of Common Pleas of Carbon County Criminal at No(s): CP-13-CR-0000267-2006
Before: STEVENS, MUSMANNO, KLEIN, BENDER, BOWES, GANTMAN, SHOGAN, FREEDBERG and CLELAND, JJ.
Opinion by: STEVENS, J.
Concurring Opinion by: CLELAND, J.
Judgment of Sentence Affirmed.

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

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. DEIYO DIXON

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. DEIYO DIXON No. 574 EDA 2007 2010 PA Super 109 Atlantic: n/a Filed: 6/15/2010
	Appeal from the Judgment of Sentence February 1, 2007 In the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County Criminal at No(s): CP-51-CR-0303761-2006
Before: STEVENS, MUSMANNO, KLEIN, BENDER, BOWES, GANTMAN, SHOGAN, FREEDBERG and CLELAND, JJ.
Opinion by: STEVENS, J.
Deiyo Dixon appeals from the judgment of sentence imposed by the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County. We have granted en banc review to address suppression and sentencing issues raised by Dixon. Following careful examination of the record before us, as well as pertinent case and statutory law, we find no error on the part of the lower court, and affirm the judgment of sentence.

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

DIANA K. BETZ, EXECUTRIX OF THE ESTATE OF CHARLES SIMIKIAN,DECEASED, v. PNEUMO ABEX LLC, successor-in-interest to ABEX CORPORATION, ALLIED SIGNAL, INC

DIANA K. BETZ, EXECUTRIX OF THE ESTATE OF CHARLES SIMIKIAN,DECEASED, v. PNEUMO ABEX LLC, successor-in-interest to ABEX CORPORATION, ALLIED SIGNAL, INC., in its own right And as successor-in-interest to ALLIED CORPORATION, successor-in-interest to BENDIX CORPORATION, BORG-WARNER CORPORATION, CARLISLE COMPANIES, INC., OKONITE COMPANY, GENERAL MOTORS CORPORATION,KELSEY-HAYES COMPANY, METROPOLITAN LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, a/k/a METROPOLITAN INSURANCE COMPANY, DAIMLER CHRYSLER CORPORATION, f/k/a CHRYSLER CORPORATION, FORD MOTOR COMPANY, VOLKSWAGEN OF AMERICA, INC., NAPA AUTOMOTIVE PARTS GROUP, ROHRICH CADILLAC, INC., DYKE MOTOR SUPPLY COMPANY INCORPORATED, SOUTH HILLS AUTO PARTS CO.
No. 1058 WDA 2006 2010 PA Super 74 Atlantic: n/a Filed: 4/30/2010

Appeal from the Order entered May 10, 2006,
Court of Common Pleas, Allegheny County,
Civil Division at No. GD 05-4662

Before: FORD ELLIOTT, P.J., STEVENS, ORIE MELVIN, LALLY-GREEN, KLEIN, BOWES, PANELLA, DONOHUE and SHOGAN, JJ.
Opinion by: DONOHUE, J.
Concurring Statement by: SHOGAN, J.

Appellant, Diana K. Betz (“Betz”), Executrix of the estate of Charles Simikian (“Simikian”), appeals from the trial court’s final order entered May 10, 2006, disposing of all claims in, and dismissing all parties to, this action. This final order followed the trial court’s grant of summary judgment to Appellees Allied Signal, Inc. (“Allied Signal”), Ford Motor Company (“Ford”), General Motors Corporation (“GMC”), and DaimlerChrysler Corporation, f/k/a Chrysler Corporation (“Chrysler”), (collectively, the “Friction Product Defendants” ). As noted infra, Simikian, a victim of mesothelioma, was a forty-four (44) year veteran of the automotive repair industry. The grant of summary judgment was based upon the trial court’s earlier grant of a defense “global” Frye motion to exclude any and all expert testimony asserting that a plaintiff contracted an asbestos-related disease as a result of exposures resulting from work in the automotive repair field. For the reasons set forth herein, we conclude that the trial court erred in granting summary judgment to the Friction Product Defendants. We so conclude because the trial court, in granting the Frye motion, based its decision neither on a “scientific” theory advanced by the Friction Product Defendants nor evidence of record. Accordingly, we reverse and remand for further proceedings consistent with this decision.
-----------------------------------------------------Want 50 state & federal case law? - click here

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. GAYLEND L. YOUNG

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. GAYLEND L. YOUNG No. 1287 MDA 2008 2010 PA Super 2 Atlantic: n/a Filed: 1/6/2010
	Appeal from the Judgment of Sentence, April 26, 2005, in the Court of Common Pleas of Centre County Criminal Division at No. CP-14-CR-0000345-2000
Before: FORD ELLIOTT, P.J., KLEIN AND COLVILLE, JJ.
Opinion by: FORD ELLIOT, P.J.
Dissenting Opinion by: COLVILLE, J.
Appellant, Gaylend L. Young, appeals the judgment of sentence entered following his conviction for various sexual offenses against his minor son. Finding no error, we affirm.

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

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. MICHAEL GREENE

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. MICHAEL GREENE No. 538 MDA 2009 2009 PA Super 256 Atlantic: n/a Filed: 12/29/2009
	Appeal from the Judgment of Sentence, January 14, 2009, in the Court of Common Pleas of Lackawanna County Criminal Division at No. CP-35-CR-0001831-2004
Before: FORD ELLIOTT, P.J., KLEIN, J. AND McEWEN, P.J.E.
Opinion by: KLEIN, J.
Dissenting Statement by: FORD ELLIOT, P.J.
Michael Greene appeals from the judgment of sentence of January 14, 2009, following his conviction of one count each of aggravated assault and simple assault. He was sentenced to life in prison without parole under Pennsylvania’s “three strikes” law, after the trial court found that two prior convictions in Massachusetts qualified as “crimes of violence” as that term is defined under Pennsylvania law. However, the relevant Massachusetts statutes incorporate the kind of robberies that would not qualify for the three strikes law in Pennsylvania, as well as those that do. The robberies for which Greene was convicted under the Massachusetts statutes could have been crimes where the victim only suffered or was put in fear of only bodily injury rather than serious bodily injury, which would be a robbery under Pennsylvania law, but would not qualify as a strike for Pennsylvania’s three strikes statute. Therefore, we find that the Massachusetts unarmed robbery and assault with intent to rob statutes do not qualify as substantially similar crimes of violence to relevant Pennsylvania law. As a result, we reverse Greene’s life sentence and remand for resentencing.

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

IN THE INTEREST OF: A.B. APPEAL OF: A.B. No. 2149 EDA 2006 2009 PA Super 252 Atlantic: n/a Filed: 12/24/2009
	Appeal from the Order entered July 6, 2006 In the Court of Common Pleas of Monroe County Criminal, No. CP-45-JV-0030033-1999
Before: STEVENS, MUSMANNO, KLEIN, BENDER, BOWES, GANTMAN, SHOGAN, FREEDBERG, AND CLELAND, JJ.
Opinion by: GANTMAN, J.
Dissenting Opinion by: KLEIN, J.
Appellant, A.B., appeals from the order entered in the Monroe County Court of Common Pleas, which denied his petition to expunge his juvenile record. Specifically, Appellant asks us to determine whether the court committed an error of law or an abuse of discretion when it denied Appellant’s petition, after he had fulfilled all of the requirements for expungement under 18 Pa.C.S.A. § 9123(a)(3). After careful review of the certified record as well as the relevant law pertaining to expungement of juvenile records, we hold the trial court misapplied the law in denying Appellant’s expungement petition, where Appellant fulfilled the requirements under Section 9123(a)(3); and the Commonwealth failed to show cause to deny expungement and retain Appellant’s juvenile record. Accordingly, we reverse and remand with directions to expunge Appellant’s juvenile record.

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

SABRINA BOWMAN v. SUNOCO, INC.

SABRINA BOWMAN v. SUNOCO, INC. No. 1897 EDA 2008 2009 PA Super 242 Atlantic: n/a Filed: 12/16/2009
	Appeal from the Order Entered May 21, 2008 In the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County Civil at No(s): December Term, 2006 No. 2227
Before: STEVENS, KLEIN, and KELLY, JJ.
Opinion by: STEVENS, J.
This is an appeal from the order entered in the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County granting a Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings filed by Defendant/Appellee, Sunoco, Inc. and dismissing Plaintiff/Appellant Sabrina Bowman’s negligence claim for injuries she sustained while working as a private security guard on Sunoco property. Specifically, the court agreed with Sunoco’s Affirmative Defense that Bowman, by signing a Worker’s Compensation Disclaimer in exchange for her employment with Allied Barton Security Services, had waived her right to file claims against clients of Allied Barton for damages otherwise covered by workers’ compensation. Herein, Bowman contends that such a release is contrary to public policy and, therefore, unenforceable. We affirm.

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

U.S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, AS TRUSTEE v. PETER H. POWERS APPEAL OF: HEATHER A. RITCH

U.S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, AS TRUSTEE v. PETER H. POWERS APPEAL OF: HEATHER A. RITCH No. 771 EDA 2008 2009 PA Super 234 Atlantic: n/a Filed: 12/7/2009
	Appeal from the Order entered January 17, 2008 In the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County Civil No. April Term, 2007, No. 2684
Before: KLEIN, PANELLA and KELLY, JJ.
Opinion by: KELLY, J.
Appellant, Heather A. Ritch, appeals from the order entered in the Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas. In this case we consider whether a party who owns property near other property and has maintained that other property for seven years is a “party in interest” under Pennsylvania Rule of Civil Procedure 3132 and has standing to petition to set aside a sheriff’s sale of that other property. We hold that she does not and affirm the trial court’s order.

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

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. RODERICK FRANCIS BAILEY

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. RODERICK FRANCIS BAILEY No. 1788 WDA 2007 2009 PA Super 230 Atlantic: n/a Filed: 12/1/2009
	Appeal from the Judgment of Sentence of September 18, 2007 in the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County, Criminal Division, No. CP-02-CR-0002377-2006
Before: KLEIN, J., McEWEN, P.J.E., and HUDOCK, J.
Opinion by: KLEIN, J.
Concurring Statement by: McEWEN, P.J.E.
Roderick Francis Bailey appeals from the judgment of sentence imposed on his convictions of various weapons charges. The trial judge, the Honorable Anthony M. Mariani, found that the consent to search was not voluntary. However, he further found that the car would have been towed and an inventory search conducted and therefore discovery of the gun in the car was inevitable. We agree and affirm. It is true that the car was not in a spot causing a hazard or blocking traffic and it was not proper to tow and inventory the car under traditional common law principles. However, the statute has a separate section allowing towing and inventory when a person is arrested and is being taken to an “issuing authority.” Since there is another section dealing with towing when the vehicle is creating a hazard, the legislative intent should be interpreted to allowing towing after an arrest even if there is no hazard.

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

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. LALLITRA LYNETTE COPPEDGE

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. LALLITRA LYNETTE COPPEDGE No. 359 MDA 2009 2009 PA Super 226 Atlantic: n/a Filed: 11/24/2009
	Appeal from the Judgment of Sentence of October 8, 2008 in the Court of Common Pleas of Franklin County, Criminal Division, No. CP-28-CR-0001626-2007cri
Before: FORD ELLIOTT, P.J., KLEIN, J. and McEWEN, P.J.E.
Opinion by: KLEIN, J.
Lallitra Lynette Coppedge scalded her then-three-year-old daughter in hot bath water, causing the child to suffer second- and third-degree burns. A jury convicted Coppedge of simple assault, 18 Pa.C.S.A. 2701(a)(1), and endangering the welfare of children, 18 Pa.C.S.A. § 4304(a)(1). She was sentenced to 12 to 36 months’ incarceration for simple assault and a consecutive 6 to 36 months’ incarceration for child endangerment. On appeal, Coppedge asserts that her sentence is illegal because simple assault should have merged with child endangerment for sentencing purposes. Because the legislature has adopted a strict, technical merger test rather than a test that considers the facts of the individual case, we are compelled to find that these two offenses do not merge. Therefore, we affirm.

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

ESTATE OF LOUIS A. HICKS, DECEASED v. DANA COMPANIES, LLC F/K/A DANA CORPORATION, ET AL. APPEAL OF: DANA COMPANIES, LLC F/K/A DANA CORPORATION APPEAL

ESTATE OF LOUIS A. HICKS, DECEASED v. DANA COMPANIES, LLC F/K/A DANA CORPORATION, ET AL. APPEAL OF: DANA COMPANIES, LLC F/K/A DANA CORPORATION APPEAL OF: JOHN CRANE, INC., F/K/A CRANE PACKING No. 3088 and 3089 EDA 2006 2009 PA Super 220 2009 PA Super 220 Atlantic: n/a Filed: 11/18/2009
	Appeal from the Judgment entered April 12, 2005, in the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County Civil Division at December Term, 2002 No. 3509
Before: FORD ELLIOTT, P.J., STEVENS, ORIE MELVIN, LALLY-GREEN, KLEIN, BOWES, PANELLA, DONOHUE, AND SHOGAN, JJ.
Opinion by: ORIE MELVIN, J.
Concurring Opinion by: KLEIN, J.
This is a consolidated appeal from the judgment entered against Appellants, Dana Companies, LLC f/k/a Dana Corporation (Dana) and John Crane, Inc., f/k/a Crane Packing (Crane), in this products liability action initiated by Appellee, the Estate of Louis A. Hicks, for his contracting malignant mesothelioma from alleged occupational exposure to the Appellants’ asbestos-containing products. Following the denial of post-trial motions and entry of judgment, an appeal to this Court was filed in which a panel of this Court affirmed the trial court. We have granted reargument en banc, however, for the principal reason of determining the impact of the Supreme Court’s decision in Gregg v. V-J Auto Parts Company, 596 Pa. 274, 943 A.2d 216 (2007). After review, we affirm.

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

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v.TERRY L. SNAVELY

---

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v.TERRY L. SNAVELY No. 1996 MDA 2008 2009 PA Super 208 Atlantic: n/a Filed: 10/30/2009
	Appeal from the Order entered October 10, 2008 In the Court of Common Pleas of Lancaster County Criminal Division at No. CP-36-CR-0001377-2006
Before: KLEIN, FREEDBERG and CLELAND, JJ.
Opinion by: CLELAND, J.
Dissenting Opinion by: KLEIN, J.
Appellant Terry L. Snavely (Snavely) appeals the order revoking his parole on a sentence of imprisonment imposed on a corruption of minors charge to which he had entered an Alford plea. Because the parole-violation order recommitted him to prison but made him immediately eligible again for parole on condition he enroll in a sex offender treatment program which required an admission of guilt to the original corruption of minors offense, he contends invoking his Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination renders impossible his ability to satisfy the condition. As such, he submits the sentence is manifestly unreasonable. For the reasons that follow, we affirm.

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

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. STEVEN T. SMITH

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. STEVEN T. SMITH No. 286 WDA 2009 2009 PA Super 209 Atlantic: n/a Petition for Reargument Filed 11/13/2009 Filed: 10/30/2009
	Appeal from the Judgment of Sentence of January 14, 2009 in the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County, Criminal Division, No. CP-02-CR-0010635-2007
Before: KLEIN, J., McEWEN, P.J.E., and HUDOCK, J.
Opinion by: KLEIN, J.
Steven T. Smith appeals from his judgment of sentence imposed following his open plea to four counts of possession of a controlled substance (cocaine), four counts of possession with intent to deliver a controlled substance (cocaine), and three counts of delivery of a controlled substance (cocaine). Smith was sentenced to an aggregate term of 7-14 years’ imprisonment after the trial court imposed the mandatory minimum for each sentence pursuant to 18 Pa.C.S. § 7508.

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

NANCY BRAUN, GUARDIAN OF THE PERSON AND ESTATE OF JOHN BRAUN, AN INCAPACITATED PERSON, AND NANCY BRAUN IN HER OWN RIGHT v. TARGET CORPORATION

NANCY BRAUN, GUARDIAN OF THE PERSON AND ESTATE OF JOHN BRAUN, AN INCAPACITATED PERSON, AND NANCY BRAUN IN HER OWN RIGHT v. TARGET CORPORATION AND THOMAS LINDSTROM & CO., INC. AND JEFFREY M. BROWN & ASSOCIATES No. 2221 EDA 2006 2009 PA Super 206 Atlantic: n/a Filed: 10/23/2009
	Appeal from the Judgments July 26, 2006 and July 28, 2006 In the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County Civil, May Term, 2004, No. 2886
Before: KLEIN, GANTMAN, AND KELLY, JJ.
Opinion by: GANTMAN, J.
Appellant, Nancy Braun, as guardian of the person and estate of her husband John Braun (“Mr. Braun”), and in her own right, appeals from the judgments entered in the Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas following the denial of her post-trial motions for removal of the compulsory nonsuit entered in favor of Appellee, Jeffery M. Brown & Associates (“JMB”), for judgment notwithstanding the verdict (“JNOV”) in favor of Appellee, Target Corporation (“Target”) and/or a new trial against both Target and JMB. We affirm.

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

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. RODNEY SOTO COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. WILLIAM AVILES COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. MELVIN WISE

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. RODNEY SOTO COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. WILLIAM AVILES COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. MELVIN WISE COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. JOSE SANCHEZ COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. KEVIN WILSON COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. EUGENE HUDNELL COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. PETE ROBINSON No. 165, 172, 179, 180, 181, 183 and 185 PHL 2008 2009 PA Super 200 Atlantic: n/a Filed: 10/16/2009
	Appeal from the PCRA Order of November 20, 2007 In the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County, Criminal, No. CP-51-CR-1204871-2001, CP-51-CR-1203211-2001 CP-51-CR-0511611-2002, CP-51-CR-1000691-2001, CP-51-CR-0405351-2004, CP-51-CR-1200351-2001, CP-51-CR-0507581-2001
Before: STEVENS, KLEIN and KELLY, JJ.
Opinion by: KLEIN, J.
These consolidated appeals are from the orders entered by the Honorable D. Webster Keogh denying defendants’ petitions for Post Conviction Relief, 42 Pa.C.S.A. § 9541-9546 (PCRA). The PCRA petitions were filed when it was discovered through a newspaper article that a chemist for the police department, Colleen Brubaker, was a drug addict and had been taking confiscated pain pills for her own use and possibly selling other types of drugs to support her habit. The PCRA court denied relief on the grounds that defendants failed to prove that the newly discovered evidence would have compelled a different result at trial. While the individual cases are different, we agree with Judge Keogh that, viewing the totality of the circumstances, none of the defendants has shown that the evidence of Brubaker’s improper activity would have compelled a different result at any of the trials. Therefore, we affirm.

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

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. DARYL J. BOICH

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. DARYL J. BOICH No. 1856 MDA 2006 2009 PA Super 195 Atlantic: 982 A.2d 102 Filed: 10/6/2009
	Appeal from the Order entered October 5, 2006 In the Court of Common Pleas of Luzerne County Criminal, No. CP-40-CR-0000024-2006
Before: FORD ELLIOTT, P.J., STEVENS, ORIE MELVIN, LALLY-GREEN*, KLEIN, BENDER, BOWES, GANTMAN, AND SHOGAN, JJ.
Opinion by: GANTMAN, J.
Dissenting Opinion by: KLEIN, J.
Appellant, the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, appeals from the order entered in the Luzerne County Court of Common Pleas, which granted the pre-trial motion of rape defendant Appellee, Daryl J. Boich, to direct the adult rape complainant (“C.U.”) to submit to an involuntary psychiatric examination for purposes of deciding her competency to testify at trial. The Commonwealth asks whether the court erred when it found compelling reasons to grant Appellee’s request. We hold the court erred when it ordered an involuntary psychiatric examination of C.U. on the grounds alleged. Accordingly, we reverse and remand for further proceedings.

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

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. CHRISTINA MARIE HOUTZ

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. CHRISTINA MARIE HOUTZ No. 1482 MDA 2008 2009 PA Super 186 Atlantic: n/a Filed: 9/16/2009
	Appeal from the Judgment of Sentence August 1, 2007, In the Court of Common Pleas of Lebanon County, Criminal Division at No. CP-38-CR-0002219-2006.
Before: KLEIN, POPOVICH, and FITZGERALD*, JJ.
Opinion by: POPOVICH, J.
Appellant Christina Marie Houtz appeals the judgment of sentence claiming that her probationary sentence was unduly restrictive and/or incompatible with her freedom of conscience. We reverse.

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

RODERICK KULIK AND ANITA KULIK, HUSBAND AND WIFE v. ROSE MASH

RODERICK KULIK AND ANITA KULIK, HUSBAND AND WIFE v. ROSE MASH No. 1171 WDA 2008 2009 PA Super 188 Atlantic: 982 A.2d 85 Filed: 9/16/2009
	Appeal from the Order entered June 9, 2008 In the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County, Civil, No. GD-07-018275
Before: KLEIN, ALLEN and COLVILLE*, JJ.
Opinion by: KLEIN, J.
Roderick Kulik appeals from the Order granting Rose Mash’s summary judgment on the ground that the claim is barred by the Workers’ Compensation Act. We agree with the ruling of the trial judge, the Honorable Paul F. Lutty, Jr., and affirm.

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

ROBERTA L. SILVER v. RALPH B. PINSKEY

ROBERTA L. SILVER v. RALPH B. PINSKEY No. 731 MDA 2007 2009 PA Super 183 Atlantic: 981 A.2d 284 Filed: 9/15/2009
	Appeal from the Order entered April 20, 2007 In the Court of Common Pleas of Dauphin County Domestic Relations, No. 2587 DR 99 PACSES #700101608
Before: FORD ELLIOTT, P.J., STEVENS, MUSMANNO, ORIE MELVIN, LALLY-GREEN*, KLEIN, GANTMAN, PANELLA, AND DONOHUE, JJ.
Opinion by: GANTMAN, J.
Appellant, Ralph B. Pinskey (“Father”), appeals pro se from the support order entered in the Dauphin County Court of Common Pleas, asking us to determine whether the trial court had subject matter jurisdiction to award Appellee, Roberta L. Silver (“Mother”), one half of the Social Security benefits Father receives as representative payee for the children. Father also challenges other sections of the order as unenforceable as written. We hold the court’s jurisdiction in this case is sound, the Social Security derivative benefits at issue can be subject to legal process under 42 U.S.C.A. § 659 to enforce a child support obligation. Nevertheless, we vacate that part of the order setting Father’s basic support obligation at $0.00 and directing him to split with Mother the monthly Social Security derivative payments of $1,164.00. We remand the matter to the trial court to correct the record to comport with the court’s intent to ensure the children will benefit from the Social Security derivative payments regardless of whether they are staying with Father or Mother. We affirm the support order in all other respects.

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

US BANK N.A. AS TRUSTEE FOR RESIDENTIAL FUNDING CO., LLC, v. PAMELA MALLORY AND JAMALL ROUNDTREE APPEAL OF: PAMELA MALLORY

US BANK N.A. AS TRUSTEE FOR RESIDENTIAL FUNDING CO., LLC, v. PAMELA MALLORY AND JAMALL ROUNDTREE APPEAL OF: PAMELA MALLORY No. 1924 EDA 2008 2009 PA Super 182 Atlantic: n/a Petition for Reargument Denied 11/24/2009 Filed: 9/14/2009
	Appeal from the Order Entered June 4, 2008 In the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County Civil at No(s): No. 001461 November Term, 2007
Before: STEVENS, KLEIN, and KELLY, JJ.
Opinion by: STEVENS, J.
This is an appeal from the order entered in the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County denying Appellant Pamela Mallory’s petition to strike and/or open the default judgment entered in favor of Appellee US Bank, N.A., as Trustee for Residential Funding Co., LLC. Appellant contends (1) the default judgment should have been stricken since the failure to plead properly an assignment of mortgage in a mortgage foreclosure action is a fatal defect apparent on the face of the record; (2) Appellee did not have standing to bring the instant mortgage foreclosure action, and consequently, the default judgment should be stricken; (3) the trial court erred in denying Appellant’s petition to open the default judgment without considering Appellant’s defenses to the action; and (4) the default judgment should be opened since Appellant met all prongs necessary for the opening of default judgments. We affirm.

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