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"
Unemployment compensation benefits claimant's appeal from determination of ineligibility was untimely where filed beyond the statutory deadline and claimant failed to present evidence overcoming the presumption of the Mailbox Rule. Order of the Unemployment Compensation Board of Review affirmed.
Publication Date: 2024-08-30 Practice Area:Criminal Law Industry: Court:Superior Court Judge:Judge Bowes Attorneys:For plaintiff: for defendant: Case Number: 1481 MDA 2023
Appellant appealed a fine imposed after his conviction of a summary offense relating to vehicle window tint. The court affirmed, holding that appellant was properly convicted of the summary offense of having unlawfully dark window tinting on his vehicle after a patrol officer pulled appellant over and performed a window tint check.
Taxpayer appealed the trial court's order upholding a school district's reliance on a monetary threshold for deciding which property tax assessments to appeal on a cost-effective basis. The court affirmed, holding that the school district's policy did not result in a per se violation of the Pennsylvania Constitution's Uniformity Clause, nor was the policy in violation of the clause as applied by the district.
Plaintiff landlord sued defendant tenant and related parties for breach of a lease agreement and ejectment. Upon trial to the court, the court found in favor of plaintiff, awarded damages, and granted plaintiff possession of the premises.
Court erred in ordering Post Conviction Relief Act counsel to file a merits brief where defendant suggested he wished to pursue ineffectiveness claims against counsel. Order of the trial court vacated, case remanded.
Appellant Delaware County Department of Human Services appealed the trial court's denial of its motion for summary judgment on the basis of sovereign immunity. The court concluded that its order denying summary judgment should be reversed and appellee's complaint against appellant dismissed. The court held that a county department of human services enjoyed sovereign immunity under the Political Subdivision Tort Claims Act when sued for allegedly negligent oversight giving rise to a minor child's physical and sexual abuse by kinship ca
Publication Date: 2024-08-30 Practice Area:Criminal Law Industry: Court:Superior Court Judge:Judge Olson Attorneys:For plaintiff: for defendant: Case Number: 766 WDA 2023
Retrieving and holding a firearm in a position ready to fire in a group of juveniles in an area known for fights and shooting was sufficient to give police reasonable suspicion that the holder of the firearm was engaged in or planned to commit criminal activity. Order of the trial court vacated, case remanded.
Plaintiff filed a pro se complaint alleging claims against defendant under the Fair Credit Reporting Act. The court dismissed the complaint without prejudice for failure to state a claim where plaintiff failed to proffer sufficient factual allegations regarding the alleged inaccuracies in his consumer credit report.
Plaintiff pension plans and defendant energy company and affiliated individuals filed cross-motions for summary judgment in plaintiffs' action for securities fraud. The court partially granted and denied the parties' motions, holding in pertinent part that plaintiffs could prove loss causation only as to defendant's misrepresentations regarding the capacity and build-out timeline for a planned pipeline, and no reasonable jury could find loss causation as to defendant's remaining challenged corrective disclosures.