Don’t forget you can visit MyAlerts to manage your alerts at any time.
114 results for '* court:"Courts of Common Pleas Bucks County"' You can use Search Constraints to get even better search results
Publication Date: 2024-11-15
Practice Area: Trusts and Estates
Industry:
Court: Courts of Common Pleas, Bucks County
Judge: Judge Fritsch
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 2023-E0600
Appellant appealed the court's decree dismissing his petition for an accounting and other relief concerning the estate of his deceased mother. The court requested that its decree be affirmed and the appeal dismissed, holding that appellant failed to demonstrate that his mother's 2003 will was forged where credible witnesses familiar with decedent's handwriting, together with documentary evidence, confirmed that the signature on her will was genuine. The court held further that witness testimony and videographic evidence supported the
Publication Date: 2024-11-15
Practice Area: Criminal Law
Industry:
Court: Courts of Common Pleas, Bucks County
Judge: Judge McHugh
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: CP-09-CR-0001892-2023
Commonwealth appealed the court's ruling granting appellee's motion to suppress his arrest and the evidence recovered thereafter. The court concluded that its order should be affirmed, holding that suppression of appellee's arrest was required where stipulations of counsel contradicted subsequent officer testimony regarding the source of information that led to appellee's warrantless arrest during a traffic stop.
Publication Date: 2024-08-02
Practice Area: Civil Appeals
Industry:
Court: Courts of Common Pleas, Bucks County
Judge: Judge Mellon
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 2015-06593
Plaintiff appealed from the trial court's order mandating that he execute settlement documents pursuant to a settlement agreement with defendant. The court concluded that the appeal should be dismissed for plaintiff's failure to file a statement of errors complained of on appeal pursuant to Pennsylvania Rule of Appellate Procedure 1925(b).
Publication Date: 2024-08-02
Practice Area: Real Estate
Industry: Real Estate | State and Local Government
Court: Courts of Common Pleas, Bucks County
Judge: Judge Trauger
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 2022-03779
In this § 1925(a) opinion, the court justified its ruling denying appellant's petition to set aside a tax sale of his property and granting a judgment of possession to Jessica Poltavskiy and urged the Commonwealth Court to affirm because appellant received adequate notice of the sale after two previous upset tax sales were the subject of notice by both posting and personal service.
Publication Date: 2024-07-26
Practice Area: Family Law
Industry:
Court: Courts of Common Pleas, Bucks County
Judge: Judge Trauger
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 2023-A9104
Appellant appealed the court's order denying his petition to adopt an adult son. The court concluded that its order should be affirmed where the parties demonstrated no good cause for proceeding with the adoption absent a relinquishment of parental rights by adoptee's father.
Law Journal Press | Digital Book
Authors: Gary L. Brown
View this BookView more book results for the query "*"
Publication Date: 2024-07-26
Practice Area: Trusts and Estates
Industry:
Court: Courts of Common Pleas, Bucks County
Judge: Judge Trauger
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 2014-E0597
Appellant brought an interlocutory appeal from the court's order decreeing the scope of a surcharge that it could impose against a self-dealing fiduciary and certain non-beneficiary third-parties. The court concluded that its order should be affirmed where it properly determined that it had authority to impose a surcharge equal to the total financial benefit received by the fiduciary and/or his non-party family members who are not beneficiaries of the trust.
Publication Date: 2024-07-26
Practice Area: Family Law
Industry:
Court: Courts of Common Pleas, Bucks County
Judge: Judge McMaster
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: A06-16-60222-C-37
In this § 1925(a) opinion, the court justified its denial of appellant's petition for modification of a custody order that continued sole legal custody and primary physical custody of appellee over child.
Publication Date: 2024-07-26
Practice Area: Deals and Transactions
Industry:
Court: Courts of Common Pleas, Bucks County
Judge: Judge Trauger
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 2021-03375
Defendant appealed the court's decision in favor of plaintiff on plaintiff's claims of unjust enrichment and conversion. The court concluded that defendant's appeal should be denied and dismissed, and the court's decision affirmed, where evidence and the court's credibility determinations supported the conclusion that defendant converted plaintiff's inherited funds to his own use.
Publication Date: 2024-07-19
Practice Area: Land Use and Planning
Industry: E-Commerce | Hospitality and Lodging | State and Local Government
Court: Courts of Common Pleas, Bucks County
Judge: Judge McMaster
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 2022-03220
Appellant property owner appealed the court's order affirming appellee township zoning hearing board's denial of his application for a variance to allow short-term rentals of his property. The court held that its decision should be affirmed where appellant (1) failed to demonstrate the existence of an unnecessary hardship that would entitle him to a dimensional variance; (2) appellee zoning hearing board's superior authority and discretion in denying the variance trumped the conditional use decision of the township board of supervisor
Publication Date: 2024-06-14
Practice Area: Medical Malpractice
Industry: Health Care
Court: Courts of Common Pleas, Bucks County
Judge: Judge Trauger
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 2021-02616
Medical malpractice plaintiffs appealed the court's order granting summary judgment in favor of defendant medical providers. The court concluded that its order should be affirmed where plaintiffs proffered no expert testimony to demonstrate defendants' deviation from acceptable medical standards, and where plaintiffs failed to demonstrate how the discovery rule tolled the statute of limitations on their otherwise untimely complaint.
Legal Speak is a weekly podcast that makes sense of what’s happening in the legal industry.
1 minute read