Filter This View

  • Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Barkley

    Publication Date: 2017-12-05
    Practice Area: Legal Ethics and Attorney Discipline
    Industry: Legal Services
    Court: Supreme Court
    Judge: Per Curiam
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 17-1773

    Respondent was suspended for two years because he was transferred to inactive status in 2002 and administratively suspended in 2010 but offered to provide legal services in immigration matters in Utah, where he was not licensed to practice, and engaged in the unauthorized practice of law in Utah, misrepresented to clients that he was an attorney who could handle immigration issues, accepted payment for legal services, failed to provide those services and failed to contact his clients or refund their fees.

  • Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Crawford

    Publication Date: 2017-12-05
    Practice Area: Legal Ethics and Attorney Discipline
    Industry:
    Court: Supreme Court
    Judge: Per Curiam
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 17-1774

    Respondent was disbarred for charging excessive fees, failing to deposit those fees into a trust or IOLTA account; neglecting clients matters, failing to refund unearned or unused fees, making direct and blatant misrepresentations to his clients about expenditures; for inadequate and unprofessional representation by not filing his appearance in a timely fashion and failing to file a pre-trial statement, attend the pre-trial con-ference or make any effort to obtain reports or depose witnesses for trial; failing to file a brief after f

  • Shiflett v. Lehigh Valley Health Network, Inc.

    Publication Date: 2017-12-05
    Practice Area: Medical Malpractice
    Industry: Health Care
    Court: Superior Court
    Judge: Judge Solano
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 17-1775

    Trial court erred in allowing plaintiffs to file a second amended complaint alleging negligence in plaintiffs treatment in hospitals transitional skills unit as well as the original negligence involved in her fall from her hospital bed because the claims regarding the TSU were time barred. Vacated and remanded.

  • Commonwealth v. Valentin-Morales

    Publication Date: 2017-12-05
    Practice Area: Criminal Law
    Industry:
    Court: Courts of Common Pleas, Lehigh County
    Judge: Judge Steinberg
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 17-1636

    Defendant could not prevail on an ineffectiveness of counsel claim for failure to call a witness where he could not demonstrate that the purported witness to his self-defense argument was available and prepared to testify on his behalf. The court recommended affirmance of an order denying defendant post-conviction relief.

  • Commonwealth v. Encarnacion-Ventura

    Publication Date: 2017-12-05
    Practice Area: Criminal Law
    Industry:
    Court: Courts of Common Pleas, Lehigh County
    Judge: Judge Steinberg
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 17-1637

    Defendants petition for habeas corpus relief constituted a petition under the Post Conviction Relief Act, and was properly denied as being untimely.

  • Commonwealth v. Stahl

    Publication Date: 2017-12-05
    Practice Area: Criminal Law | Evidence
    Industry:
    Court: Superior Court
    Judge: Judge Bender
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 17-1767

    Motion for judgment of acquittal in rape trial properly denied where victim testified to being severely intoxicated and passing out during the sexual encounter at issue, which was sufficient to demonstrate the victims lack of consent. Order of the trial court affirmed.

  • Commonwealth v. Grey

    Publication Date: 2017-12-05
    Practice Area: Criminal Law | Evidence
    Industry:
    Court: Courts of Common Pleas, Lehigh County
    Judge: Judge Steinberg
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 17-1723

    The court denied a motion to exclude admission of cellular telephone evidence where the courts order was based on an affidavit that was not misleading and which provided sufficiently accurate information to allow the court to issue the order.

  • Macias v. The Sch. Dist. of the City of Allentown

    Publication Date: 2017-12-05
    Practice Area: Personal Injury
    Industry: Education | State and Local Government
    Court: U.S. District Court for Pennsylvania - Eastern
    Judge: District Judge Perkin
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 17-1772

    Plaintiffs §1983 claim under state-created danger theory failed where plaintiff failed to plead facts establishing that state actors did not act with deliberate indifference or committed affirmative act to create danger, where plaintiff alleged that state actors failed to report continued inappropriate behavior by plaintiffs attacker. Defendants motion for summary judgment granted.

  • Jones v. FC USA, Inc.

    Publication Date: 2017-12-05
    Practice Area: Civil Procedure | Personal Injury
    Industry: Travel and Tourism
    Court: U.S. District Court for Pennsylvania - Eastern
    Judge: District Judge DuBois
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 17-1769

    Action dismissed for forum non conveniens, where courts in foreign country where alleged assault occurred were more appropriate forum as they could compel witness testimony and had compelling interest in adjudicating claims of assault within their borders, if plaintiffs claims were not time-barred under local statute of limitations. Defendants motion to dismiss granted.

  • Commonwealth v. Schmidt

    Publication Date: 2017-12-05
    Practice Area: Criminal Law
    Industry:
    Court: Courts of Common Pleas, Lawrence County
    Judge: Judge Cox
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 17-1728

    The court suppressed statements by a defendant which were deliberately elicited from him prior to Miranda warnings. Criminal charges overlapping those for which defendant pleaded guilty in federal court were barred by double jeopardy considerations.