Superior Court - CLAIRE L. KROPA v. GATEWAY FORD, RICHARD F. ADAMS, DISCOVER PROPERTY & CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY, and SEDGWICK CLAIMS MANAGEMENT

CLAIRE L. KROPA v. GATEWAY FORD, RICHARD F. ADAMS, DISCOVER PROPERTY & CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY, and SEDGWICK CLAIMS MANAGEMENT SERVICES, INC. No. 1446 MDA 2008 2009 PA Super 91 Atlantic: 974 A.2d 502 Petition for Reargument Denied 7/21/2009 Filed: 5/15/2009
	Appeal from the Order Entered on July 21, 2008, In the Court of Common Pleas of Wyoming County, Civil at No(s): 2007-00990
Before: BOWES, DONOHUE, and FREEDBERG, JJ.
Opinion by: FREEDBERG, J.
Appellant, Claire Kropa, appeals from the order entered on July 21, 2008, granting summary judgment in favor of Gateway Ford (“Gateway”) and Appellee, Discover Property & Casualty Insurance Company (“Discover”). We affirm.

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

Superior Court - KAREN PRIDGEN, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ESTATE OF LENDON N. PRIDGEN, DECEASED, AND AS PERSONAL

KAREN PRIDGEN, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ESTATE OF LENDON N. PRIDGEN, DECEASED, AND AS PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ESTATE OF ANTHONY W. CIPPARONE, DECEASED; DENISE DIGGEN, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ESTATE OF DANIEL DIGGEN, DECEASED; AND DEBRA JOHNSON, INDIVIDUALLY AND ON BEHALF OF TYLER JOHNSON, AS PARENT AND NATURAL GUARDIAN OF TYLER JOHNSON, A MINOR v. PARKER HANNIFIN CORPORATION, BASCO FLYING SERVICE, INC., TEXTRON LYCOMING RECIPROCATING ENGINE DIVISION, TEXTRON, INC. AND AVCO CORPORATION APPEAL OF: TEXTRON, INC., AVCO CORPORATION AND TEXTRON LYCOMING RECIPROCATING ENGINE DIVISION No. 974 EDA 2008 2009 PA Super 90 Atlantic: 974 A.2d 1166 Petition for Reargument Denied 7/28/2009 Filed: 5/15/2009
	Appeal from the Order Entered February 19, 2008, Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County, Civil Division, at Nos. 003838 and 004008, July Term, 2001.
Before: KLEIN, SHOGAN, JJ. and McEWEN, P.J.E.
Opinion by: SHOGAN, J.
Textron, Inc., AVCO Corporation and Textron Lycoming Reciprocating Engine Division (collectively “Appellants”) appeal from the order entered on February 19, 2008, in the Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas that denied Appellants’ motion for summary judgment. The appellees in this matter are Karen Pridgen, individually and as Personal Representative of the estate of Lendon N. Pridgen, deceased, and as Personal Representative of the estate of Anthony W. Cipparone, deceased; Denise Diggen, individually and as personal representative of the estate of Daniel Diggen, deceased; and Debra Johnson, individually and on behalf of Tyler Johnson, as parent and natural guardian of Tyler Johnson, a minor (collectively “Appellees”). Additionally, we are faced with a motion to quash filed by Appellees. Upon review, we grant Appellees’ motion to quash.

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

CHRISTINE T. WALLS v. THE PHOENIX INSURANCE COMPANY

CHRISTINE T. WALLS v. THE PHOENIX INSURANCE COMPANY No. 1702 EDA 2008 2009 PA Super 93 Atlantic: n/a Filed: 5/19/2009
	Appeal from the Order entered May 28, 2008, in the Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County, Civil Division, January Term, 2008, No. 2057
Before: KLEIN, SHOGAN, JJ., and McEWEN, P.J.E.
Opinion by: McEWEN, P.J.E.
Appellant, Christine T. Walls, appeals from the order of the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia transferring this case to the Court of Common Pleas of Monroe County on grounds of forum non conveniens. We reverse.

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

Superior Court - ERIE INSURANCE EXCHANGE v. ABBOTT FURNACE COMPANY AND INNOVATIVE MAGNETICS, INC. APPEAL OF: ABBOTT FURNACE COMPANY

ERIE INSURANCE EXCHANGE v. ABBOTT FURNACE COMPANY AND INNOVATIVE MAGNETICS, INC. APPEAL OF: ABBOTT FURNACE COMPANY No. 139 WDA 2008 2009 PA Super 88 Atlantic: 972 A.2d 1232 Filed: 5/13/2009
	Appeal from the Judgment December 27, 2007, In the Court of Common Pleas of Elk County, Civil Division at No. 2003-846.
Before: BOWES, FREEDBERG, and POPOVICH, JJ.
Opinion by: POPOVICH, J.
Appellant Abbott Furnace Company appeals from the December 27, 2007 judgment entered in favor of Appellee Erie Insurance Exchange. Upon review, we affirm.

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

Superior Court - COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. MICHAEL BURTON

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. MICHAEL BURTON No. 1932 EDA 2007 2009 PA Super 87 Atlantic: 973 A.2d 428 Filed: 5/13/2009
	Appeal from the Judgment of Sentence June 28, 2007, In the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County, Criminal at No(s): CP-51-CR-0805111-2005
Before: FORD ELLIOTT, P.J., STEVENS, MUSMANNO, LALLY-GREEN, BENDER, PANELLA, DONOHUE, ALLEN and FREEDBERG, JJ.
Opinion by: FREEDBERG, J.
Concurring Opinion by: STEVENS, J.
Concurring Opinion by: LALLY-GREEN, J.
Appellant Michael Burton appeals from the judgment of sentence of five to ten years imprisonment imposed following his conviction on the charge of possession with intent to deliver cocaine. Appellant contends that the trial court erred in denying his motion to suppress. Appellant’s counsel filed a concise statement of the errors complained of on appeal as ordered by the trial court pursuant to Rule 1925(b) of the Pennsylvania Rules of Appellate Procedure. However, the concise statement was filed one day beyond the deadline set by the trial court.

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

Superior Court - IN THE INTEREST OF: D.P., MINOR IN THE INTEREST OF: D.M., MINOR IN THE INTEREST OF: J.M., MINOR APPEAL OF: A.M.

IN THE INTEREST OF: D.P., MINOR IN THE INTEREST OF: D.M., MINOR IN THE INTEREST OF: J.M., MINOR APPEAL OF: A.M. No. 1443, 1444, 1445 MDA 2008 2009 PA Super 86 Atlantic: 972 A.2d 1221 Filed: 5/6/2009
	Appeal from the Order Entered July 10, 2008, Court of Common Pleas, Lancaster County, Juvenile Division, at No. 1012 of 2005, 1013 of 2005, 1014 of 2005 Formerly CP-36-DR-00000597-2005.
Before: PANELLA, SHOGAN and KELLY, JJ.
Opinion by: SHOGAN, J.
In these consolidated appeals, Appellant, A.M. (“Mother”), appeals from the dispositional order in dependency proceedings which changed the permanency goal for Mother’s three male children, D.P. (D.O.B. 2/2/94), D.M. (D.O.B. 12/23/95), and J.M. (D.O.B. 3/9/98) (collectively, “Children”). The Children were previously adjudicated dependent pursuant to the Juvenile Act, 42 Pa.C.S.A. § 6301 et seq. In the order on appeal, the trial court changed the goal for the family from reunification to adoption, and ordered a concurrent permanency goal of “placement in another planned living arrangement intended to be permanent.” We affirm.

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

Superior Court - IN THE INTEREST OF: M.W. APPEAL OF M.W

IN THE INTEREST OF: M.W. APPEAL OF M.W. No. 1037 WDA 2007 2009 PA Super 85 Atlantic: 972 A.2d 1213 Filed: 5/5/2009
	Appeal from the Order Dated May 8, 2007, In the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County Juvenile at No(s): JV 06-001033
Before: GANTMAN, ALLEN, and FREEDBERG, JJ.
Opinion by: FREEDBERG, J.
Appellant, M.W., appeals from the dispositional order entered on May 8, 2007, by the Juvenile Division of the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County. For the reasons discussed below, we affirm.

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

Superior court - COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. MATTHEW C. SIBLEY

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. MATTHEW C. SIBLEY No. 81 WDA 2008 2009 PA Super 84 Atlantic: n/a Filed: 5/5/2009
	Appeal from the Judgment of Sentence of October 11, 2007, In the Court of Common Pleas of Butler County, Criminal Division, at No. CP-10-CR-0002553-2006.
Before: LALLY-GREEN, GANTMAN and COLVILLE*, JJ.
Opinion by: COLVILLE, J.
This case is a direct appeal from judgment of sentence. The issue is whether the evidence was sufficient to support Appellant’s conviction for driving under the influence (“DUI”) in violation of 75 Pa.C.S.A. § 3802(c) (blood alcohol concentration (“BAC”) = 0.160 %). We affirm the judgment of sentence.

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

Superior Court - COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. GREGORY MEARS

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. GREGORY MEARS No. 1003 EDA 2008 2009 PA Super 83 Atlantic: 972 A.2d 1210 Filed: 5/4/2009
	Appeal from the Judgment of Sentence Entered March 18, 2008, Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County, Criminal Division, at No. CP-51-CR-0010314-2007.
Before: KLEIN, SHOGAN, JJ. and McEWEN, P.J.E.
Opinion by: SHOGAN, J.
Appellant, Gregory Mears, appeals from the judgment of sentence entered on March 18, 2008, in the Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas. After careful review, we vacate in part and affirm in part.

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

Superior Court - LISA ANN DOLAN AND GERALD DOLAN v. ANTHONY FISSELL

LISA ANN DOLAN AND GERALD DOLAN v. ANTHONY FISSELL No. 239 EDA 2008 2009 PA Super 82 Atlantic: 973 A.2d 1009 Petition for Reargument Denied 7/8/2009 Filed: 5/1/2009
	Appeal from the Order entered December 19, 2007 In the Court of Common Pleas of Chester County, Civil, No. 05-09983
Before: KLEIN, SHOGAN, JJ. and McEWEN, P.J.E.
Opinion by: KLEIN, J.
Anthony Fissell appeals from the order entering a $434,757.25 judgment against him and in favor of plaintiffs Lisa Ann Dolan and Gerald Dolan (for loss of consortium) for a motor vehicle accident after he appealed from an arbitration award against him for $28,220. Among other arguments, Fissell claims that the court erred in 1) allowing Dolan to withdraw her stipulation to proceed on medical reports and limit her recovery to $25,000; and 2) allowing the expert initially retained by Fissell to testify for Dolan. After review of the cogent opinion of the trial judge, the Honorable Edward Griffith, the submissions by the parties and relevant law, we affirm.

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