In the Matter of the Claim of Miyoung Park v. Commissioner of Labor

Court reviewed an interlocutory order denying defendant's motion to appear remotely at an evidentiary hearing or to waive his appearance.

The court vacated and remanded the trial court's order dismissing the Commonwealth's petition to revoke defendant's participation in the accelerated rehabilitative disposition program following her arrest for, inter alia, criminal trespass, disorderly conduct, aggravated assault.

No Harm From Respondents' Alleged Violation of The In Terrorem Clause

Evidence was sufficient to support first-degree murder conviction where appellant admitted to shooting the victims and the manner of their death permitted the jury to infer that defendant had specific intent to kill. Judgment of sentence affirmed.

A sentencing court may not lawfully consider a defendant's record of prior arrests which did not result in either juvenile adjudications or adult convictions as a factor in sentencing. Reversed and remanded.

The court denied defendant's motion for summary judgment in a case alleging violations of the Family and Medical Leave Act in the termination of a key employee because genuine disputes of material fact of whether the termination was caused by business reasons or as retaliation for taking FMLA leave would have to be resolved by a jury.

The court affirmed the trial court's order that an employee could bring an action for liquidated damages under the Wage Payment and Collection Law, 42 Pa. C.S. §§ 260.1-260.45, regardless of whether the employer has paid all outstanding wages by the time legal action commenced.

Plaintiff appealed summary judgment in favor of defendants in her Consumer Fraud Act and Truth in Consumer Contract Warranty and Notice Act action.

Defendant moved to dismiss plaintiff's putative telemarketing class action claims. The court granted the motion, dismissing plaintiff's claim under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act with prejudice where plaintiff alleged that the numbers dialed by defendant's auto dialer system originated from a pre-produced list that was not randomly or sequentially generated, with the result that the complaint failed to allege that defendant's system qualified as an automatic telephone dialing system under the Act.