Filter This View

  • In the Interest of: J.P., a minor

    Publication Date: 2018-02-13
    Practice Area: Family Law
    Industry:
    Court: Superior Court
    Judge: Judge Stevens
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 18-0137

    Foster parent lacked standing to intervene in dependency hearing, after being decertified as a foster parent and failing to take any steps toward adoption, but was merely entitled to notice of hearing and an opportunity to be heard. Order of the trial court affirmed.

  • Stange v. Janssen Pharm., Inc.

    Publication Date: 2018-02-06
    Practice Area: Products Liability
    Industry: Pharmaceuticals
    Court: Superior Court
    Judge: Judge Elliot
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 18-0117

    Defendant drug companies were not entitled to JNOV in plaintiffs failure to warn action because plaintiffs expert used a generally accepted scientific process to conclude that defendants drug caused plaintiffs gynecomastia, the trial court properly instructed the jury on combined negligence and properly refused to instruct the jury on plaintiffs future damages claim and the evidence fully supported the jurys decision but the coordinating judge erred in granting a global motion barring punitive damages claims. Affirmed in part, r

  • Commonwealth v. Tyrrell

    Publication Date: 2018-02-06
    Practice Area: Criminal Law
    Industry:
    Court: Superior Court
    Judge: Judge Stabile
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 18-0108

    Minor sexual abuse victim properly permitted to testify via CCTV where trial court heard testimony from treating psychotherapist that victim suffered from depression and PTSD, feared facing her abuser in court, and accordingly would be negatively impacted in her ability to testify by defendants presence. Judgment of sentence affirmed.

  • In re: Adoption of J.N.M.

    Publication Date: 2018-02-06
    Practice Area: Family Law
    Industry:
    Court: Superior Court
    Judge: Judge Strassburger
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 18-0101

    The trial court did not err in terminating mothers parental rights where mother and her two children had an undisputed bond, but the record supported the conclusion that the bond was unhealthy given mothers mental health problems, continued drug use and ongoing criminal problems. The appellate court affirmed an order terminating mothers parental rights.

  • Rutyna v. Schweers

    Publication Date: 2018-01-30
    Practice Area: Expert Witnesses | Legal Malpractice
    Industry: Health Care | Legal Services
    Court: Superior Court
    Judge: Judge Lazarus
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 18-0036

    Trial court abused its discretion in denying appellants request for a continuance after appellants found out that their expert witness was unable to testify less than three weeks before trial and they were unable to secure a competent witness who would have sufficient time to prepare his testimony for trial because the trial court thus determined the outcome of appellants case. Reversed.

  • Law Journal Press | Digital Book

    Federal False Claims Act and Qui Tam Litigation

    Authors: Joel M. Androphy

    View this Book

    View more book results for the query "*"

  • Commonwealth v. Edwards

    Publication Date: 2018-01-30
    Practice Area: Criminal Law
    Industry:
    Court: Superior Court
    Judge: Judge Olson
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 17-1916

    While the listing of the races and genders of prospective jurors on a peremptory strike sheet did not per se violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment as interpreted by the U.S. Supreme Court in Batson v. Kentucky, defendant established a Batson violation by showing that the commonwealth struck at least one potential juror with discriminatory intent. The appellate court vacated defendants judgment of sentence and remanded.

  • Commonwealth v. Adams

    Publication Date: 2018-01-30
    Practice Area: Criminal Law
    Industry:
    Court: Superior Court
    Judge: Judge Solano
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 18-0059

    The trial court did not err in denying defendants motion to dismiss charges based on double jeopardy grounds where the evidence supported the trial courts credibility finding that both the police and prosecutorial misconduct that led to a mistrial was unintentional. The appellate court affirmed the trial courts judgment of sentence.

  • Commonwealth v. Cline

    Publication Date: 2018-01-30
    Practice Area: Criminal Law | Evidence
    Industry:
    Court: Superior Court
    Judge: Judge Stevens
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 17-1915

    The jury properly found defendant guilty of violating the Wiretapping and Electronic Surveillance Control Act where he knowingly and intentionally recorded a courthouse custody conference with his cell phone without the attendees permission, regardless of whether defendant knew the law proscribed such acts. The court affirmed defendants judgment of sentence.

  • Chevalier et al v. General Nutrition Centers, Inc. et al

    Publication Date: 2018-01-30
    Practice Area: Class Actions | Labor Law
    Industry: Retail
    Court: Superior Court
    Judge: Judge Moulton
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 18-0057

    The defendant employer did not violate the Pennsylvania Minimum Wage Act by calculating the plaintiffs overtime compensation using a fluctuating workweek method, but did violate the law by paying plaintiffs and other managers an overtime premium of only one-half of their the regular rate. The appellate court affirmed the trial courts judgment in part and reversed in part.

  • In Re: Estate of Scarpaci

    Publication Date: 2018-01-23
    Practice Area: Trusts and Estates
    Industry:
    Court: Superior Court
    Judge: Judge Lazarus
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 18-0066

    Pending divorce action was not a basis for forfeiture of spousal share where grounds for divorce had not been establish where decedent had not filed his affidavit of consent to no-fault divorce, and where decedents removal from marital residence was not spouses refusal to support. Order of the orphans court reversed.