RICHARD & DEBRA D’ADAMO v. ERIE INSURANCE EXCHANGE

RICHARD & DEBRA D’ADAMO v. ERIE INSURANCE EXCHANGEDONALD HOLOCHER AND LISA HOLOCHER, HIS WIFE v. ERIE INSURANCE EXCHANGE
No. 479 and 480 MDA 2008 2010 PA Super 77 Atlantic: n/a Filed: 4/30/2010

Appeal from the Judgment entered November 12, 2008
In the Court of Common Pleas of Lackawanna County
Civil, Nos. 2257-2006 and 2258-2006

Before: LALLY-GREEN, GANTMAN, AND ALLEN, JJ.
Opinion by: GANTMAN, J.

Appellants, Richard and Debra D’Adamo and Donald and Lisa Holocher, appeal from the judgments entered in the Lackawanna County Court of Common Pleas on Appellants’ statutory arbitration awards. Appellants ask us to determine whether the arbitrators properly gave Appellee, Erie Insurance Exchange (“Erie”), a credit of $750,000.00 on each award to account for Appellants’ recoveries from the tortfeasor’s liability insurance policies. We hold Erie was entitled to a credit of $750,000.00 on each arbitration award, consistent with Appellants’ recoveries from the tortfeasor’s liability insurance policies; and the court properly refused to vacate/modify the arbitration awards to disallow the credits. Accordingly, we affirm the judgments entered on the arbitration awards.
-----------------------------------------------------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

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. 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

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

DENNIS PRINGLE AND CHRISTINE A. PRINGLE, in their own right as parentand natural guardians of Austin Pringle, a minor v. ADOLFO RAPAPORT, D.O.

DENNIS PRINGLE AND CHRISTINE A. PRINGLE, in their own right as parentand natural guardians of Austin Pringle, a minor v. ADOLFO RAPAPORT, D.O. and ADOLFO RAPAPORT, D.O., P.C. No. 173 WDA 2007 2009 PA Super 171 Atlantic: 980 A.2d 159 Filed: 8/31/2009
	Appeal from the Judgment entered January 4, 2007, Court of Common Pleas, Clearfield County, Civil Division at No. 2003-624-CD
Before: FORD ELLIOTT, P.J., STEVENS, MUSMANNO, ORIE MELVIN, LALLY-GREEN, KLEIN, GANTMAN, PANELLA and DONOHUE, JJ.
Opinion by: DONOHUE, J.
Dissenting Opinion by: ORIE MELVIN, J.
Dennis Pringle and Christine Pringle (collectively, “the Pringles”), in their own right as parents and natural guardians of their son Austin Pringle (“Austin”), appeal from the judgment entered following a jury verdict in a medical malpractice case in favor of appellees, Adolfo Rapaport, D.O., and Adolfo Rapaport, D.O., P.C. (collectively, “Dr. Rapaport”). The Pringles contend that the trial court erred, inter alia, in including an “error of judgment” instruction during the charge to the jury at the trial of their medical malpractice action against Dr. Rapaport. After an exhaustive review of decisional law, we conclude that the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania has never addressed the appropriateness of this charge, and that the decisions of panels of this Court are irreconcilable. Thus, following our careful review, we conclude that the “error of judgment” instruction should not be given in medical malpractice actions, as it does not inform jurors on the applicable standard of care and instead tends only to confuse, rather than clarify, the issues the jury must decide. We thus reverse and remand for a new trial.

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

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. RICHARD BROADEN, JR.

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. RICHARD BROADEN, JR. No. 1549 WDA 2008 2009 PA Super 153 Atlantic: 980 A.2d 124 Petition for Reargument Denied 10/9/2009 Filed: 8/3/2009
	Appeal from the Judgment of Sentence September 20, 2007 In the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County Criminal at No. CP-02-CR-0013894-2006
Before: LALLY-GREEN, POPOVICH, and FREEDBERG, JJ.
Opinion by: FREEDBERG, J.
This is an appeal from judgment of sentence entered by the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County after Appellant, Richard Broaden, Jr., pleaded guilty to a myriad of charges. We affirm.

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

COLLEEN MURPHY v. JAMES MCDERMOTT

COLLEEN MURPHY v. JAMES MCDERMOTT No. 2047 MDA 2007 2009 PA Super 151 Atlantic: 979 A.2d 373 Filed: 7/31/2009
	Appeal from the Order entered on October 24, 2007, in the Court of Common Pleas of Luzerne County, Domestic Relations, No. 1703 of 2002, PASCES No. 604104872
Before: LALLY-GREEN, FREEDBERG, and FITZGERALD,* JJ.
Opinion by: LALLY-GREEN, J.
Concurring and Dissenting Opinion by: FITZGERALD, J.
Appellant, James McDermott (“Father”), appeals from the order entered in the Luzerne County Court of Common Pleas, dismissing his exceptions to a support order for the parties’ minor child, A.M. (“Child”), born on July 30, 2002. We hold that the court erred in calculating: (1) Father’s 2008 income by including one-time stock options exercised in 2007; (2) Father’s 2006 and 2007 income by failing to calculate perquisite income from personal use of a company-provided vehicle appropriately; and (3) Father’s income by not accounting for the withdrawal penalty when it included his employer’s gross contributions to his 26 U.S.C. § 401(k) and stock accounts. Accordingly, we vacate the order and remand for further proceedings.

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

DEBRA FRENCH, AS ADMINISTRATRIX OF THE ESTATE OF BRIAN P. FRENCH, DECEASED, AND IN HER OWN RIGHT AS AN INDIVIDUAL v. COMMONWEALTH ASSOCIATES, INC.

DEBRA FRENCH, AS ADMINISTRATRIX OF THE ESTATE OF BRIAN P. FRENCH, DECEASED, AND IN HER OWN RIGHT AS AN INDIVIDUAL v. COMMONWEALTH ASSOCIATES, INC.; UNITED CONVEYOR CORPORATION; AND THE BABCOCK AND WILCOX COMPANY, AND/OR A/K/A BABCOCK & WILCOX CONSTRUCTION CO., INC., AND/OR A/K/A BABCOCK & WILCOX EBENSBURG POWER, INC.,AND DEBRA FRENCH, AS ADMINISTRATRIX OF THE ESTATE OF BRIAN P. FRENCH, DECEASED, AND IN HER OWN RIGHT AS AN INDIVIDUAL v. GILBERT/COMMONWEALTH, INC., OF MICHIGAN, FORMERLY KNOWN AS COMMONWEALTH ASSOCIATES, INC. A/K/A AND/OR GILBERT/COMMONWEALTH, INC., FORMERLY KNOWN AS GILBERT ASSOCIATES, INC., A/K/A AND/OR GILBERT/COMMONWEALTH INTERNATIONAL INC. No. 1191 WDA 2008 2009 PA Super 152 Atlantic: n/a Petition for Reargument Denied 10/6/2009 Filed: 7/31/2009
	Appeal from the Order June 18, 2008 In the Court of Common Pleas of Lawrence County Civil, Nos. 10251 of 2003 CA, 10312 of 2003 CA, and 10401 of 2003 CA
Before: LALLY-GREEN, GANTMAN, AND COLVILLE, JJ.
Opinion by: GANTMAN, J.
Dissenting Statement Opinion by: LALLY-GREEN, J.
Appellant, Debra French, as administratrix of the estate of Brian P. French, deceased, and in her own right as an individual, appeals from the order of the Lawrence County Court of Common Pleas, denying her petition to open and/or strike the judgment of non pros, based on the court’s determination that Appellant failed to file a timely certificate of merit under Pa.R.C.P. 1042.3. Specifically, Appellant asks us to determine whether her products liability/breach of warranty claims against the Gilbert defendants (“Appellee”) should survive the judgment of non pros, absent a certificate of merit. We hold the trial court erred when it failed to review Appellant’s entire complaint to determine which counts sounded in professional negligence and which counts sounded in products liability/breach of warranty, so that only the professional negligence claims might be subject to a judgment of non pros for failure to file a certificate of merit. Accordingly, we vacate and remand for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

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

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. LAMONT BOOKARD

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. LAMONT BOOKARD No. 1557 EDA 2007 2009 PA Super 146 Atlantic: 978 A.2d 1006 Filed: 7/29/2009
	Appeal from the PCRA Order of April 26, 2007 in the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County, Criminal, Nos. CP-51-CR-0707741-2000, CP-51-CR-0707751-2000
Before: FORD ELLIOTT, P.J., STEVENS, ORIE MELVIN, LALLY-GREEN, KLEIN, BOWES, PANELLA, DONOHUE and SHOGAN, JJ.
Opinion by: KLEIN, J.
Dissenting Opinion by: DONOHUE, J.
Lamont Bookard appeals from an order denying his request for post-conviction relief on the ground that his trial counsel, attorney Susan Burt-Collins, was ineffective for failing to ask for a charge on alibi. We find that counsel articulated a reasonable strategic basis for failing to request such a charge; she had an alternate theory of defense and did not want to cloud the issue by focusing on an alibi defense. Since it was questionable as to whether it was impossible for Bookard to be present to commit the crime, and counsel did not want the jury distracted by that issue, we believe that strategy was reasonable and therefore we affirm the denial of post-conviction relief.

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

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. AARON L. JONES

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. AARON L. JONES No. 582 WDA 1008 2009 PA Super 145 Atlantic: 978 A.2d 1000 Filed: 7/27/2009
	Appeal from the Order Entered March 7, 2008, in the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County Criminal Division at No. 200518797
Before: FORD ELLIOTT, P.J., LALLY-GREEN AND ALLEN, JJ.
Opinion by: FORD ELLIOT, P.J.
This is an appeal by the Commonwealth from an order granting appellee’s motion to suppress. We reverse and remand.

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

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. GEORGE VINCENT KUBIS

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. GEORGE VINCENT KUBIS No. 1644 EDA 2008 2009 PA Super 140 Atlantic: 978 A.2d 391 Filed: 7/21/2009
	Appeal from the Judgment of Sentence May 12, 2008 In the Court of Common Pleas of Bucks County Criminal Division at No. CP-09-CR-0008943-2007
Before: LALLY-GREEN, BENDER and FITZGERALD, JJ.
Opinion by: BENDER, J.
George Kubis (Appellant) was found guilty of robbery and related charges by a jury on March 13, 2008 and was sentenced to twenty-five to fifty years’ imprisonment. On appeal, Appellant contends that there was insufficient evidence to convict him of robbery, that denial of his motions to suppress physical evidence and identification evidence was improper, and that irrelevant evidence was improperly admitted at trial. After review, we affirm.

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

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. JOSHUA LILLEY, SR.

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. JOSHUA LILLEY, SR. No. 1986 WDA 2008 2009 PA Super 143 2009 PA Super 143 Atlantic: 978 A.2d 995 Filed: 7/21/2009
	Appeal from the Judgment of Sentence October 29, 2008 In the Court of Common Pleas of Erie County, Criminal at No(s): CP-25-CR-0003024-2007
Before: LALLY-GREEN, FREEDBERG, and POPOVICH, JJ.
Opinion by: FREEDBERG, J.
Appellant, Joshua Lilley, Sr., appeals from judgment of sentence entered by the Court of Common Pleas of Erie County. Appellant’s court-appointed counsel (“Counsel”) has filed a brief and a petition to withdraw from this appeal on the basis of frivolity. After conducting an independent review of the record, we grant the petition to withdraw and affirm judgment of sentence.

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

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. STEPHEN FOGLIA

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. STEPHEN FOGLIA No. 2079 EDA 2007 2009 PA Super 138 Atlantic: 979 A.2d 357 Filed: 7/21/2009
	Appeal from the Judgment of Sentence of May 31, 2007, in the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County, Criminal Division, at No. CP-51-CR-1301295-2006
Before: FORD ELLIOTT, P.J., STEVENS, ORIE MELVIN, LALLY-GREEN, KLEIN, BOWES, PANELLA, DONOHUE and SHOGAN, JJ.
Opinion by: BOWES, J.
Dissenting Opinion by: DONOHUE, J.
On appeal, Stephen Foglia challenges the constitutionality of a police interdiction that led to the discovery of his possession of an unlicensed firearm. We affirm.

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

GABRIEL G. OCASIO v. PRISON HEALTH SERVICES

GABRIEL G. OCASIO v. PRISON HEALTH SERVICES No. 2002 WDA 2008 2009 PA Super 136 Atlantic: 979 A.2d 352 Filed: 7/17/2009
	Appeal from the Order October 27, 2008, In the Court of Common Pleas of Somerset County, Civil Division at No. 1020 Civil 2008.
Before: LALLY-GREEN, FREEDBERG, and POPOVICH, JJ.
Opinion by: POPOVICH, J.
Gabriel G. Ocasio appeals from the October 27, 2008 order entered in the Court of Common Pleas, Somerset County, which denied his petition to proceed in forma pauperis and dismissed his complaint with prejudice as being frivolous. Upon review, we affirm.

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

CHARLES MOYER, INDIVIDUALLY, AND AS PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ESTATES OF RONALD MOYER AND JUDY MOYER, DECEASED, DONNA MOYER, INDIVIDUALLY,

CHARLES MOYER, INDIVIDUALLY, AND AS PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ESTATES OF RONALD MOYER AND JUDY MOYER, DECEASED, DONNA MOYER, INDIVIDUALLY, AND AS PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ESTATES OF RONALD MOYER AND JUDY MOYER, DECEASED AND LEISURECRAFT, INC. v.TELEDYNE CONTINENTAL MOTORS, INC., TELEDYNE, INC. SUPERIOR AIR PARTS, INC., PIEDMONT HAWTHORNE AVIATION, INC., A/K/A AND/OR F/K/A PIEDMONT AVIATION SERVICES, INC., PIEDMONT/HAWTHORNE AVIATION, INC., AND/OR PIEDMONT HAWTHORNE AVIATION, LLC AND DIVCO, INC. No. 1402 EDA 2007 2009 PA Super 124 Atlantic: n/a Filed: 7/7/2009
	Appeal from the Order entered May 29, 2007 In the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County Civil at No(s): January Term, 2005, No. 02577
Before: FORD ELLIOTT, P.J., STEVENS, ORIE MELVIN, LALLY-GREEN, KLEIN, BOWES, PANELLA, DONOHUE and SHOGAN, JJ.
Opinion by: STEVENS, J.
Dissenting Opinion by: PANELLA, J.
The instant matter is an action based on claims of negligence, breach of warranty and strict liability stemming from a single engine aircraft crash. Appellants, the adult children of decedents Ronald Moyer and Judy Moyer, appeal from the trial court’s Orders granting summary judgment in favor of Appellee Teledyne Continental Motors, Inc. (hereinafter “TCM”), and Appellee Piedmont Hawthorne Aviation, Inc., (hereinafter “Piedmont”) and from the Order sustaining the preliminary objections of Appellee DivCo, Inc. (hereinafter DivCo). Upon a review of the record, we affirm and find inapplicable the exceptions to the eighteen (18) year statute of repose established by the governing federal statute, the General Aviation Revitalization Act of 1994 (“GARA”), Pub.L. No. 103-298, 108 Stat. 1552 (codified as amended at 49 U.S.C.S. 40101, Note).

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

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. MICHELLE NECOLE GRIFFITH

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. MICHELLE NECOLE GRIFFITH No. 1315 MDA 2008 2009 PA Super 120 Atlantic: n/a Petition for Reargument Denied 9/11/2009 Filed: 7/2/2009
	Appeal from the Judgment of Sentence June 25, 2008 In the Court of Common Pleas of Berks County Criminal Division at No. CP-06-CR-0003318-2006
Before: LALLY-GREEN, BENDER, JJ. and McEWEN, P.J.E.
Opinion by: BENDER, J.
Dissenting Statement Opinion by: LALLY-GREEN, J.
Michelle Necole Griffith appeals the judgment of sentence imposed following her conviction of Driving Under the Influence of a Controlled Substance. 75 Pa.C.S. § 3802(d)(2). Griffith contends that the trial court erred in refusing to suppress prescription medication seized from the defendant’s car after police transported her to a local hospital for blood testing. Griffith also asserts that the evidence adduced at trial was not sufficient to sustain a conviction under section 3802(d)(2), as the Commonwealth did not introduce expert testimony to establish that the medications found in her bloodstream could have impaired her ability to drive safely. Upon review, we concur in Griffith’s conclusion that the evidence was not sufficient to sustain her conviction under section 3802(d)(2). Accordingly, we reverse said conviction, vacate the judgment of sentence, and remand this matter for re-sentencing.

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

TIFFANY REKUN, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS ADMINISTRATRIX OF THE ESTATE OF NEIL REKUN v. CARL PELAEZ No. 2321 EDA 2008 2009 PA Super 113 Atlantic: n/a Filed: 6/22/2009
	Appeal from the Judgment entered July 2, 2008 In the Court of Common Pleas of Pike County, Civil, No. 1277-2001-Civil
Before: STEVENS, LALLY-GREEN and KLEIN, JJ.
Opinion by: KLEIN, J.
Tiffany Rekun, the Administratrix of the Estate of Neil Rekun, initially filed suit against Carl Pelaez after Neil Rekun was killed while riding a motorcycle when hit by Pelaez. Ultimately, the parties agreed to binding arbitration before former Court of Common Pleas Judge Thomas Raup. Judge Raup found Neil Rekun 60% negligent and Carl Pelaez 40% negligent and determined the damages to be $800,000. The parties agreed on a cap on damages of $100,000.

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

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v.ANTHONY MICHAEL LAWSON

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v.ANTHONY MICHAEL LAWSON No. 2668 EDA 2008 2009 PA Super 110 Atlantic: n/a Filed: 6/10/2009
	Appeal from the Judgment of Sentence entered July 24, 2008 In the Court of Common Pleas of Monroe County, Criminal, No. CP-45-CR-0000921-2007
Before: STEVENS, LALLY-GREEN and KLEIN, JJ.
Opinion by: KLEIN, J.
Anthony Michael Lawson appeals his sentence following his conviction for Prohibited Offensive Weapon (POW) after being found in possession of a knife in a sheath that could be locked in a 90-degree position as well as in a straight position. Lawson argues that the Commonwealth failed to prove that the knife found in his possession met the definition of a prohibited offensive weapon. The trial judge found that the Commonwealth proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the knife had no common lawful purpose and convicted Lawson to 6 months’ to 24 years’ imprisonment. We agree and affirm.

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

Superior Court - DAVID THIERFELDER AND JOANNE THIERFELDER, H/W v. IRWIN WOLFERT, M.D., AND MEDICAL CENTER AT GWYNEDD AND ABINGTON MEMORIAL HOSPITAL

DAVID THIERFELDER AND JOANNE THIERFELDER, H/W v. IRWIN WOLFERT, M.D., AND MEDICAL CENTER AT GWYNEDD AND ABINGTON MEMORIAL HOSPITAL No. 571 EDA 2007 2009 PA Super 92 Atlantic: n/a Filed: 5/19/2009
	Appeal from the Order entered February 5, 2007 In the Court of Common Pleas of Montgomery County, Civil, No. 04-03111 (consolidated with 03-11978)
Before: FORD ELLIOTT, P.J., and STEVENS, ORIE MELVIN, LALLY-GREEN, KLEIN, BOWES, PANELLA, DONOHUE and SHOGAN, JJ.
Opinion by: KLEIN, J.
Dissenting Opinion by: LALLY-GREEN, J.
Joanne Thierfelder (Wife/Joanne) appeals from an order sustaining preliminary objections and dismissing claims against Irwin Wolfert, M.D. Wife’s complaint essentially alleged that Dr. Wolfert acted negligently when he had a consensual sexual relationship with her for one year while she was his patient and being treated by him for anxiety and depression. As a result of that affair, Wife claimed that she suffered and will continue to suffer significant psychological harm. Because it is alleged that Dr. Wolfert, although a general practitioner, was rendering psychological care to Joanne, we believe that she has a cause of action and therefore reverse the grant of preliminary objections.

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