|
|
|
|
Monday, June 29, 2009
Commonwealth Court administrative law
Snyder v. Commonwealth, Dept. of Transportation
Because a faulty motor vehicle inspection is not a lesser-included-offense of not conducting an inspection at all, the trial court did not err in refusing to impose a two-month suspension upon a mechanic who admitted that he had conducted a faulty inspection but who was charged only with placing an inspection sticker on a vehicle without conducting an inspection. Affirmed.
Criminal Practice
Lawson v. Pennsylvania Bd. of Probation and Parole
Because the timeliness of a parole revocation hearing is governed by statute and regulation and because neither statute nor regulation contains a “due diligence” requirement, petitioner received a timely parole revocation hearing when such hearing was held within 120 days of the board’s receipt of official verification of petitioner’s conviction. Affirmed.
government
National Rifle Ass’n v. City of Philadelphia
The city of Philadelphia’s ordinances pertaining to assault weapons and straw purchasers were invalid because Section 6120(a) of the Pennsylvania Uniform Firearms Act precludes local regulation of such transactions. Affirmed.
taxation
Appeal of the City of Pittsburgh from the Action of the Bd. of Property Assessment Appeals
Because the Pittsburgh Trust for Cultural Resources failed to establish that the subject properties were “necessary for the occupancy and enjoyment” of the trust, as required by the General County Assessment Law, the trust was not entitled to exemption from real estate taxes on the properties. Reversed.
workers’ compensation
Allegheny Ludlum Corp. v. Workers’ Compensation Appeal Board (Bascovsky)
An employer’s offset for a defined contribution plan is calculated based on the accumulated funds in the employee’s account. The Commonwealth Court reversed the order of the Workers’ Compensation Appeal Board (WCAB), which had reversed the Workers’ Compensation Judge (WCJ) denying claimant’s petition to review benefit offset.
Courts of Common Pleas Criminal Practice
Commonwealth v. Penalver
The issues of unlawful arrest or improper execution of a warrant were not relevent to the issues of forfeiture before the court, and it recommended its decision to grant the commonwealth’s petition be affirmed.
Criminal Practice
Commonwealth v. Verner
A police officer who spoke to a defendant did not place her in any form of detention and did not need to have reasonable suspicion to communicate with her. The court recommended affirmance of defendant’s conviction.
Criminal Practice
Commonwealth v. Verner
A police officer who spoke to a defendant did not place her in any form of detention and did not need to have reasonable suspicion to communicate with her. The court recommended affirmance of defendant’s conviction.
family law
Lux v. Lux
The court ended spousal support and ordered alimony of $900 a month for eight years with no further claims for equitable distribution.
torts
Coleman v. Moser
When the issue is whether a municipality is negligent for failing to provide a traffic control device, traffic studies are necessary to establish the claim. The court granted defendant township’s motion for summary judgment.
torts
Hain v. Borough of West Reading
There was no proximate cause between the steel subcontractor’s failure to provide galvanized steel for the exterior steel on a construction project and plaintiff’s injury during his performance of masonry repair work necessitated by the replacement of that steel. The court granted summary judgment to various defendants, after having done so for other defendants in a previous decision(PICS Case No. 09-0822).
torts
Poorman’s Welding & Fabrication, Inc.
Because Pennsylvania has adopted Section 552 of the Restatement (Second) of Torts and because there was a genuine issue of material fact as to whether defendant was negligent in supplying design information upon which plaintiff relied in constructing a bridge component, defendant was not entitled to summary judgment. Motion for summary judgment denied.
CIVIL PRACTICE
Rearick v. Estate of Rearick
The court had no authority to rescind the transfer of certain property from the legal title holder to another where the legal title holder held a valid judgment and executed on that valid judgment through the prescribed procedures. Defendants’ motion for summary judgment granted.
FAMILY LAW
Smeltzer v. Stichter
Both the court and the mother sought to provide the opportunity for father to spend time with his child, and the court established a custody order allowing time for the father to spend with the child.
JUVENILE LAW
In the Interest of M.S.
The ruling against a juvenile should not be dismissed where the court failed to enter findings or recommendations as to the juvenile’s treatment within the timeframe stipulated in court rules where the Juvenile Act did not provide for dismissal. Post-disposition motion for relief denied.
PRODUCTS LIABILITY
Krug v. Wegman’s Deli and Catering, Inc.
Plaintiff could not seek compensation from the retailer for a broken tooth because of bone matter in the meat defendant sold him. The court sustained defendant’s preliminary objections.
Superior Court CIVIL PRACTICE
TCPF Limited Partnership v. Skatell
The trial court did not err in denying plaintiff’s motion to amend its complaint because plaintiff’s proposed amendment was contrary to the rule of law that a warrant of attorney to confess judgment may not be exercised twice for the same debt. Affirmed.
Criminal Practice
Commonwealth v. Sinnott
Malicious intention” as required by the language the statute defining the crime of ethnic intention only may be found to exist where the circumstances establish that the defendant was motivated by animus toward the victim’s race or ethnicity and targeted the victim expressly on that basis. Finding ample evidence to sustain defendant’s conviction of terroristic threats, but insufficient to sustain his conviction of ethnic intimidation, the Superior Court affirmed the judgment of sentence in part and reversed in part.
family law
Krebs v. Krebs
Trying to hide a signficant increase in income from a former spouse and the court was the sort of obstreperous behavior justifying an award of counsel fees. The Superior Court vacated and remanded the trial court’s limitation of its award of attorney’s fees to only $5,000.
CIVIL PRACTICE
Roche v. Sparkle City Realty
Plaintiffs’ claims related to a real estate transaction were barred by a one-year statute of limitation, as plaintiffs’ assertion of “recoupment” was just an affirmative defense that did not affect the limitations period. Defendant’s motion to dismiss granted.
Supreme Court criminal practice
Commonwealth v. Reed
A deficient appellate brief does not create a presumption of prejudice sufficient to establish ineffective assistance of counsel. The Supreme Court reversed the Superior Court’s decision, which in turn had reversed the Post Conviction Relief Act (PCRA) court’s denial of relief.
MOTOR VEHICLES
Erie Insurance Exchange v. Baker
The “household exclusion” in a motor vehicle insurance policy is valid and enforceable to preclude the payment of underinsured motorist (UIM) benefits. The Supreme Court affirmed the Superior Court’s ruling.
U.S. District Court - Middle Civil Practice
Banks v. United States
Where orders directing a pro se plaintiff to respond to motions were in plain English, and he made no attempt to seek an extension of time to respond, or advise the court that he did not understand what he was procedurally required to do for more than five months, his actions were clearly dilatory and amounted to failure to prosecute. The court dismissed the action.
civil rights
Snavely v. Arnold
A claim for First Amendment retaliation cannot be based upon a plaintiff’s employer’s mistaken belief that he engaged in protected speech. The court granted in part and denied in part defendants’ motion to dismiss.
U.S. District Court - Eastern consumer protection
Hinchliffe v. Option One Mortgage Corp.
Defendant was entitled to judgment as a matter of law on plaintiffs’ claims alleging violation of the Truth in Lending Act and other federal and state consumer protection laws because the purpose of the loan secured by plaintiffs’ residence was to provide funds to finance plaintiff-husband’s real estate investments. Motion for summary judgment granted.
consumer protection
Taggart v. Chase Bank N.A.
The Truth in Lending Act has a one-year statute of limitations. The court dismissed the complaint without leave to amend further after converting the motion to dismiss to a motion for summary judgment.
contracts
Ford v. Exel, Inc.
Where the agreement at issue unambiguously obligated the third-party defendant to waive claims, indemnify and/or defend defendant only if there were an action against the defendant by the third-party defendant or its insurers and where the claim asserted in Count I of the third-party complaint did not satisfy that requirement, the third-party defendant was entitled to summary judgment in its favor on Count I. Motion for summary judgment granted.
Criminal Practice
Perez v. United States
The All Writs Act empowers federal courts to fashion extraordinary remedies when the need arises but it does not authorize them to issue ad hoc writs when compliance with statutory procedures is possible. Where the post-conviction procedures of 28 U.S.C. § 2255 are available, as was the case here, the court cannot grant relief under the All Writs Act.
employment
Sampson v. School Dist. of Lancaster
Defendant was not entitled to summary judgment on plaintiff’s claim alleging retaliation under Title VII for her filing of an EEOC claim because plaintiff produced sufficient evidence to raise questions about defendant’s allegedly non-discriminatory reason for terminating her employment. Motion for summary judgment granted in part, denied in part.
Evidence
Czarnecki v. Home Depot USA, Inc.
In a products liability action concerning an allegedly defective ladder, the court considered a number of motions in limine from both parties, granting some and denying some.
torts
Hower v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.
Absent evidence of the time the spilled liquid remained on the floor prior to plaintiff’s slip-and-fall accident, plaintiff was unable to establish that defendant had constructive notice of the floor’s dangerous condition. Motion for summary judgment granted.
CRIMINAL PRACTICE
United States v. Styer
The district court did not abuse its discretion in refusing to reduce defendant’s sentence, although he was eligible for a reduction pursuant to a Sentencing Code amendment, given the district court’s well-reasoned concerns regarding the threat defendant posed to public safety. Affirmed.
CRIMINAL PRACTICE
United States v. Jaitly
A defendant arrested in one district for violating conditions of release in another district is not entitled to a preliminary hearing and determination of probable cause in the district of arrest. Motion for preliminary hearing denied.
CRIMINAL PRACTICE
United States v. Waters
Defendant did not prove actual prosecutorial vindictiveness where the evidence showed that the indictment against him was based on his involvement in a drug conspiracy rather than his decision to stop cooperating with a government investigation. Motion to vacate denied.
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY
Noasha LLC v. Nordic Group of Companies, Ltd.
When there is no likelihood of confusion between marks, injunctive relief is improper. The court denied the motion for preliminary injunction.
torts
Martinez v. Skirmish
A paintball facility’s waiver and release effectively barred all negligence claims against that facility even though plaintiff did not speak English well enough to read that waiver. The court granted summary judgment to defendant Skirmish, two weeks after granting summary judgment to the other defendants.
TORTS
Bucci v. Wachovia Bank
A bank normally has no fiduciary duty to its customers. The court partially dismissed claims against plaintiff’s bank arising from negotiating unauthorized checks.
U.S. District Court - Western CIVIL PRACTICE
Burkhardt-Deal v. Citifinancial
Pre-certification class discovery often requires a court to balance significant burdens on the defendant with the need to establish class numerosity and similar class criteria. Here, the court partially granted plaintiff’s motion to compel and extended pre-certification class discovery.
Civil Practice
Camesi v. University of Pittsburgh Medical Center
Only a case that is on all fours with an earlier filed action is subject to dismissal under the “first-filed” rule. The court denied defendant’s motion to dismiss.
Huber v. Taylor
Under 28 U.S.C. § 455(a) a judge must recuse himself or herself when a reasonable person, knowing all of the circumstances, would harbor doubts as to the judge’s impartiality. The trial court recused itself.
|
|
|
Home
