• Berezniak v. City of New Castle Zoning Hearing Bd.

    Publication Date: 2023-05-29
    Practice Area: Administrative Law
    Industry: Real Estate | State and Local Government
    Court: Courts of Common Pleas, Lawrence County
    Judge: Judge Hodge
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:

    Case Number: 70082 OF 2021, M.D.

    Appellant, an LLC, filed suit against the City of New Castle Zoning Hearing Board. The suit focused on the issue of a sign permit granted to a landowner for his property. Appellant argued that the sign was installed without a permit and remained up for an extended period of time.

  • Commonwealth v. Jones

    Publication Date: 2023-05-29
    Practice Area: Criminal Law
    Industry:
    Court: Courts of Common Pleas, Lawrence County
    Judge: Judge Cox
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:

    Case Number: 30 OF 2022, C.R.

    Defendant filed a motion for post-sentence relief, which included various motions challenging the denial of his motion to withdraw guilty plea and the validity of the guilty plea. Defendant argued that he should have been allowed to withdraw his guilty plea due to his claim of innocence, lack of understanding of the plea, and absence of prejudice to the prosecution. The court denied defendant's motions in their entirety, finding that his plea was knowingly and voluntarily entered.

  • Three Rivers Aggregates, LLC v. New Beaver Borough

    Publication Date: 2023-05-29
    Practice Area: Land Use and Planning
    Industry: Mining and Resources | State and Local Government
    Court: Courts of Common Pleas, Lawrence County
    Judge: Judge Hodge
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:

    Case Number: 70122 of 2021, MD

    Appellant appealed the denial of its application for a conditional use permit to conduct surface mining operations on leased property. The court reversed appellee borough council's decision denying the conditional use permit application.

  • Commonwealth v. Scott

    Publication Date: 2023-05-29
    Practice Area: Criminal Law
    Industry:
    Court: Courts of Common Pleas, Lawrence County
    Judge: Judge Cox
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:

    Case Number: 530 OF 2021

    Defendant filed an omnibus pretrial motion consisting of a motion to suppress and a petition for writ of habeas corpus. The court denied the motion to suppress and granted the habeas petition in part and denied it in part.

  • Castle Realty v. Paul Lynch Inv., Inc.

    Publication Date: 2023-05-29
    Practice Area: Contractual Disputes
    Industry: Real Estate
    Court: Courts of Common Pleas, Lawrence County
    Judge: Judge Hodge
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:

    Case Number: 10519 of 2019

    Defendant appealed the court's orders granting plaintiff's motion for judgment on the pleadings and related relief in plaintiff's action for breach of commercial real estate listing agreements. The court requested that the Commonwealth Court affirm its orders and dismiss defendant's appeal.

  • Law Journal Press | Digital Book

    Delaware County Court Rules 2024

    Authors:

    View this Book

    View more book results for the query "*"

  • Galizia v. Galizia

    Publication Date: 2023-05-22
    Practice Area: Trusts and Estates
    Industry:
    Court: Courts of Common Pleas, Lawrence County
    Judge: Judge Hodge
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:

    Case Number: 10645 of 2019, C.A.

    Additional defendants filed preliminary objections to defendant wife's first amended complaint against them. The court granted the preliminary objections, holding that defendant wife failed to set forth claims for resulting trust, unjust enrichment and constructive trust where her husband's mother transferred the mother's corporate stock, of which the husband allegedly was de facto owner, into an irrevocable family trust that named the husband as trustee and the mother's grandchildren as beneficiaries.

  • Commonwealth v. Farris

    Publication Date: 2023-05-22
    Practice Area: Criminal Law
    Industry:
    Court: Courts of Common Pleas, Lawrence County
    Judge: Judge Hodge
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:

    Case Number: 157 OF 2021, CR

    Defendant filed an omnibus pretrial motion, in the nature of a petition for writ of habeas corpus, alleging Commonwealth failed to present a prima facie case for the financial theft charges levied against him. The trial court denied the motion.

  • Commonwealth v. Procopio

    Publication Date: 2023-05-22
    Practice Area: Criminal Law
    Industry:
    Court: Courts of Common Pleas, Lawrence County
    Judge: Judge Motto
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:

    Case Number: 934 OF 2018, C.R.

    Defendant filed an omnibus pretrial motion that included a petition for writ of habeas corpus, a motion for hearing to determine competency of a minor witness, and a motion to suppress the minor witness's identification. The court denied the omnibus motion, finding that the minor witness was competent to testify and that her identification of defendant in a photo lineup was not the result of undue suggestion.

  • Commonwealth v. Thomas

    Publication Date: 2023-05-15
    Practice Area: Criminal Law
    Industry:
    Court: Courts of Common Pleas, Lawrence County
    Judge: Judge Hodge
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:

    Case Number: 345 OF 2022, C.R.

    The court granted defendant's motion to suppress his custodial statements to police, finding that the Commonwealth failed to meet its burden to show that defendant's purported Miranda waiver was knowingly and voluntary.

  • Williams v. Geer

    Publication Date: 2023-05-15
    Practice Area: Trusts and Estates
    Industry:
    Court: Courts of Common Pleas, Lawrence County
    Judge: Judge Hodge
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:

    Case Number: 10889-2021, C.A.

    Plaintiffs appealed the trial court's grant of defendants' preliminary objections and dismissal on the basis of lack of jurisdiction. The trial court recommended that its order be affirmed because jurisdiction over plaintiffs' claims rested with the Orphans Court, where an existing action involving the same matters already was on file.