J.M.R. v. J.M.

J.M.R. v. J.M. No. 1745 MDA 2009 2010 PA Super 120 Atlantic: n/a Filed: 7/9/2010
	Appeal from the Order Entered September 8, 2009 In the Court of Common Pleas of York County Civil Division at No. 2009-FC-473-03
Before: BENDER, PANELLA and LAZARUS, JJ.
Opinion by: BENDER, J.
J.M. (“Father”) appeals from the trial court’s order entered September 8, 2009, granting J.M.R. (“Mother”) primary physical custody of the parties’ minor child, R.A.M. (d.o.b. 8/4/04) (“Child”). We affirm.

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

REVEREND MELVIN S. MUNDIE v. CHRIST UNITED CHURCH OF CHRIST

REVEREND MELVIN S. MUNDIE v. CHRIST UNITED CHURCH OF CHRIST No. 573 MDA 2009 2009 PA Super 262 Atlantic: n/a Filed: 12/31/2009
	Appeal from the Order March 3, 2009, In the Court of Common Pleas of Adams County, Civil Division at No. 08-S-1251.
Before: BENDER, GANTMAN, and POPOVICH, JJ.
Opinion by: POPOVICH, J.
Appellant Reverend Melvin S. Mundie appeals the order sustaining Appellee Christ United Church of Christ’s preliminary objection and dismissing Appellant’s complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. After careful review, we reverse.

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

Superior Court - ESTATE OF MATTHEW CONSIDINE v. WACHOVIA BANK AND ROBERT E. ROZINSKI

ESTATE OF MATTHEW CONSIDINE v. WACHOVIA BANK AND ROBERT E. ROZINSKI No. 3191 EDA 2007 2009 PA Super 21 Atlantic: 966 A.2d 1148 Filed: 2/4/2009
	Appeal from the Order entered November 7, 2007 In the Court of Common Pleas of Montgomery County Civil No. 05-15251
Before: SHOGAN, KELLY, JJ. & McEWEN, P.J.E.
Opinion by: KELLY, J.
The estate of Matthew Considine, Appellant, has filed an appeal from the order entered by the Court of Common Pleas of Montgomery County granting Appellee Robert Rozinski’s motion for summary judgment. We quash, finding that we do not have jurisdiction to hear the appeal.

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

Superior Court - SMITHKLINE BEECHAM CORP., D/B/A GLAXOSMITHKLINE, ESTHER CHEUNG, MINNIE IWAMTO AND ROSEMARY LECOMPTE v. STOP HUNTINGDON ANIMAL CRUELTY

SMITHKLINE BEECHAM CORP., D/B/A GLAXOSMITHKLINE, ESTHER CHEUNG, MINNIE IWAMTO AND ROSEMARY LECOMPTE v. STOP HUNTINGDON ANIMAL CRUELTY USA, HUGS FOR PUPPIES, INC., NICHOLAS COONEY, DAVID LAMBON, CHRISTOPHER SEMICK, AMANDAH POVILITUS AND JOHN DOES 1-10 APPEAL OF: NICHOLAS COONEY No. 2034 and 2035 EDA 2007 2008 PA Super 237 Atlantic: 959 A.2d 352 Filed: 10/3/2008
	Appeal from the Order entered June 22, 2007 In the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County, Civil, No. 0366 November Term, 2006
Before: ORIE MELVIN, KLEIN and FITZGERALD, JJ.
Opinion by: KLEIN, J.
Nicholas Cooney appeals from the order finding him in contempt of a November 27, 2006 injunction (“the 2006 injunction”) and the issuance of a more restrictive injunction, dated June 22, 2007 (“the 2007 injunction”). Cooney claims on appeal that the 2007 injunction is an unconstitutional restriction on his First Amendment free speech rights, that the lower court impermissibly assumed extraterritorial jurisdiction in issuing the 2007 injunction, and that the lower court erred in finding him to be in contempt of the 2006 injunction. We affirm in part and reverse in part.

-----------------------------------------------------
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?