• Porter v. Voelkl

    Publication Date: 2024-06-21
    Practice Area: Damages
    Industry:
    Court: Courts of Common Pleas, Monroe County
    Judge: Judge Zulick
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:

    Case Number: 2341 CV 2022

    The court entered an award of negligence damages in favor of plaintiff after he suffered a dog attack and obtained default judgment against the dog's owners. Based upon evidence that included plaintiff's medical history and the opinion testimony of plaintiff's expert medical witness, the court awarded plaintiff some $500,000 for pain and suffering, loss of earnings or earning capacity, and future loss of earnings or earning capacity.

  • Emmett v. Delta Air Lines

    Publication Date: 2024-06-21
    Practice Area: Consumer Protection
    Industry: Aerospace | E-Commerce
    Court: U.S. District Court for Pennsylvania - Western
    Judge: District Judge Colville
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:

    Case Number: 2:22-1568

    Company's non-consensual use of session replay software to track users' inputs was sufficient to constitute a potential violation of the Pennsylvania Wiretap Act. Defendant's motion to dismiss denied in part and granted in part.

  • Sadowski v. Ella 227, LLC

    Publication Date: 2024-06-21
    Practice Area: Real Estate
    Industry:
    Court: Courts of Common Pleas, Allegheny County
    Judge: Judge Hertzberg
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:

    Case Number: 440 WDA 2024

    In this § 1925(a) opinion, the court urged the Superior Court to affirm its order resolving all issues raised by the petition of the next-door neighbor for a property to be placed in conservatorship under the Abandoned and Blighted Property Conservatorship Act, 68 P.S. §§1101-1120, following an evidentiary hearing.

  • Caldwell v. Jaurigue

    Publication Date: 2024-06-21
    Practice Area: Family Law
    Industry:
    Court: Supreme Court
    Judge: Justice Dougherty
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:

    Case Number: 30 MAP 2023

    Appellant appealed the Superior Court's order requiring that he pay child support to child's biological father. The court reversed, holding that a deceased mother's paramour, who obtained in loco parentis standing and was awarded partial physical custody of child, had no child support liability where he did not have legal custody and thus was not child's "parent."

  • Bloomsburg Town Ctr., LLC v. Town of Bloomsburg

    Publication Date: 2024-06-21
    Practice Area: Land Use and Planning
    Industry: Health Care | Real Estate | State and Local Government
    Court: Commonwealth Court
    Judge: Judge Cannon
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:

    Case Number: 151 C.D. 2023

    Applicants appealed the trial court's denials of their zoning appeals. The court affirmed, holding that appellants were not entitled to a curative amendment to appellee's allegedly exclusionary zoning code where appellants' desired use of their properties for a "transitional living facility" reflected a particular business model rather than a single use.

  • Law Journal Press | Digital Book

    Constangy’s Field Guide to The Americans with Disabilities Act and Its Amendments 2014

    Authors: Michael D. Malfitano

    View this Book

    View more book results for the query "*"

  • In re: Appeal of Chestnut Hill Cmty. Ass'n

    Publication Date: 2024-06-21
    Practice Area: Land Use and Planning
    Industry: State and Local Government
    Court: Commonwealth Court
    Judge: Judge Leavitt
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:

    Case Number: 1034 C.D. 2022

    Appellant property owner appealed the trial court's order granting objectors' land use appeal. The court reversed, holding that owner's parcel was subject to a special city zoning code provision governing corner lots, which ultimately meant the property had no front yard setback requirements in light of the zoning district where it was situated.

  • Azaravich v. Wilkes-Barre Hosp. Co., LLC

    Publication Date: 2024-06-21
    Practice Area: Medical Malpractice
    Industry: Health Care
    Court: Superior Court
    Judge: Judge Nichols
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:

    Case Number: 44 MDA 2023

    Appellant appealed the trial court's order granting summary judgment in favor of defendant healthcare providers. The court reversed and remanded for further proceedings, holding that when the record was viewed in appellant's favor as the non-movant, genuine issues of material fact existed as to whether appellees committed gross negligence in evaluating and releasing appellant's deceased brother, who killed himself shortly after expressing suicidal thoughts and seeking mental health treatment.

  • Wingate v. McGrath

    Publication Date: 2024-06-21
    Practice Area: Personal Injury
    Industry:
    Court: Courts of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County
    Judge: Judge Powell
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:

    Case Number: 2879 EDA 2023

    Defendant appealed the court's order denying her motion for reconsideration of the court's order granting plaintiffs a new trial. The court concluded that its order should be reversed where plaintiffs waived their objection to defendant's medical expert witness by failing to renew their pre-trial motion in limine until after defendant's expert testified at trial.

  • Garris v. Warden Fairton FCI

    Publication Date: 2024-06-20
    Practice Area: Criminal Law
    Industry:
    Court: U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
    Judge: Per Curiam
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:

    Case Number: 23-2449

    Appellant appealed the denial of his habeas petition that challenged the Bureau of Prisons' calculation of his federal sentence.

  • Hunt v. Vardaro

    Publication Date: 2024-06-14
    Practice Area: Family Law
    Industry:
    Court: Superior Court
    Judge: Judge Panella
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:

    Case Number: 976 WDA 2023

    Trial court correctly dismissed custody complaint for lack of in loco parentis standing where petitioner had not resided with the child for nearly five years and the child's father and sole living parent had custody and objected to visitation with petitioner. Order of the trial court affirmed.