PATSY LANCE, Administratrix for the Etate of CATHERINE RUTH LANCE v. WYETH, f/k/a, AMERICAN HOME PRODUCTS CORPORATION

PATSY LANCE, Administratrix for the Etate of CATHERINE RUTH LANCE v. WYETH, f/k/a, AMERICAN HOME PRODUCTS CORPORATION No. 2905 EDA 2008 2010 PA Super 137 Atlantic: n/a Filed: 8/2/2010
	Appeal from the Judgment entered September 19, 2008, Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County, Civil, at No. 926, November Term 2006
Before: STEVENS, GANTMAN and ALLEN, JJ.
Opinion by: ALLEN, J.
Plaintiff, Patsy Lance (“Appellant”), Administratrix for the Estate of Catherine Ruth Lance (“Lance”), appeals from the trial court’s order granting summary judgment in favor of Wyeth, formerly known as American Home Products Corporation (“Wyeth”). We affirm in part and reverse in part.

-----------------------------------------------------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

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