Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.
Get alerted any time new stories match your search criteria. Create an alert to follow a developing story, keep current on a competitor, or monitor industry news.
Thank You!
Don’t forget you can visit MyAlerts to manage your alerts at any time.
How To Use Search Constraints
Categorical
judge:"Steven Andrews"
court:Florida
topic:"Civil Appeals"
practicearea:Lobbying
Boolean
"Steven Andrews" AND Litigation
"Steven Andrews" OR "Roger Dalton"
Litigation NOT "Roger Dalton"
"Steven Andrews" AND Litigation NOT Florida
Combinations
(Florida OR Georgia) judge:"Steven Andrews"
((Florida AND Georgia) OR Texas) topic:"Civil Appeals"
Publication Date: 2017-10-10 Practice Area:Criminal Law Industry: Court:Superior Court Judge:Judge Shogan Attorneys:For plaintiff: for defendant: Case Number: 17-1543
Trial court properly found appellant guilty of fleeing or attempting to elude a police officer when she drove off after officer told her to pull over because appellants argument that a pursing police officer applied to both fleeing and attempting to elude lacked merit since the statute was clear and unambiguous. Affirmed.
The commonwealth could offer the testimony of an accounting expert in case involving alleged theft by skimming since his comparison of cash-to-check ratios over time to investigate the alleged theft was a generally accepted methodology in the relevant field of accounting. The court denied defendants motion to preclude expert testimony.
The defendant general contractor was immune from suit as a statutory employer where it was responsible for the overall construction project since the fact that it did not perform concrete work did not preclude a finding that such work was part of defendants regular business. The court granted defendants motion for summary judgment.
Trial court did not err in applying lower insurance policy limit under each occurrence limit, though not referenced by the policy, where the only reasonable interpretation was for each occurrence to mean the lower each common cause limit referenced in the policy. Order of the trial court affirmed.
The county was required to provide copies of requested records under the Right to Know Law where the requesting party sufficiently identified the records requested, and the documents constituted financial records under the statute.
CHIRA entitled plaintiff to recover legal costs and fees incurred to correct inaccurate criminal history records maintained by Pennsylvania State Police. Petition for summary relief granted in part and denied in part.
Pursuant to Pennsylvania precedent following the U.S. Supreme Courts 2012 decision in Miller v Alabama, the court rejected defendants claim that his sentence to 30-years-to-life for a homicide committed while he was a juvenile was illegal.
Where a petitioner for guardianship relied on hearsay evidence, the family of the respondent was providing her with care, and the respondent herself testified lucidly about not wanting or needing a guardianship, the court properly denied the petition.
Trial court correctly found that insurer owed no duty to defend car driver because automobile insurance policy contained an unlisted resident driver exclusion and driver was policyholders live-in girlfriend, was not related to him.
Petitioner political party failed to establish that the anti-fusion provisions of the election code were unconstitutional because the Magazzu Loophole did not create a major party exemption from the ban on any political organization nominating a candidate of another political organization.