Don’t forget you can visit MyAlerts to manage your alerts at any time.
368 results for '* court:"Courts of Common Pleas Lawrence County"' You can use Search Constraints to get even better search results
Publication Date: 2022-09-19
Practice Area: Government
Industry: Real Estate | State and Local Government
Court: Courts of Common Pleas, Lawrence County
Judge: Judge Motto
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 10612 OF 2021, C.A.
Court granted in part and denied in part defendant city official's motion to dismiss plaintiff homeowner's complaint for negligence arising out of the city's failure to issue citations to neighbors who refused to correct sewage leakage. The court denied the motion in part finding that defendant as a city official owed a duty to investigate sewage leakage and was responsible for doing so under the Clean Streams Law. The court agreed, however, that defendant's failure to issue sewage citations did not amount to malicious conduct and the
Publication Date: 2022-09-19
Practice Area: Legal Ethics and Attorney Discipline
Industry: Insurance | Legal Services
Court: Courts of Common Pleas, Lawrence County
Judge: Judge Hodge
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 10727 of 2021, C.A.
Counsel was disqualified from representing the defendants and cross-complainants in these consolidated cases since his current representation in this matter was adverse to the relationship he had established with plaintiff, a former client, through whom he had acquired confidential information relevant to this suit. The court granted a motion to disqualify counsel.
Publication Date: 2022-09-12
Practice Area: Contractual Disputes
Industry: State and Local Government
Court: Courts of Common Pleas, Lawrence County
Judge: Judge Hodge
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 22-0988
Court denied preliminary objections to a plaintiff's tort complaint arising out of defendant city's refusal to pay plaintiff as a surviving spouse under her ex-husband's pension plan. The court denied the objections finding that while the current police pension plan provided that the benefits should be paid towards a surviving spouse, the plan that was approved by the city and implemented for more than twenty years allowed plaintiff to be paid pursuant to a Domestic Relations Order which was in effect as a result of a divorce settleme
Publication Date: 2022-09-12
Practice Area: Contractual Disputes
Industry: State and Local Government
Court: Courts of Common Pleas, Lawrence County
Judge: Judge Hodge
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 22-0989
Court denied preliminary objections to a plaintiff's tort complaint arising out of defendant city's refusal to pay plaintiff as a surviving spouse under her ex-husband's pension plan. The court denied the objections finding that while the current police pension plan provided that the benefits should be paid towards a surviving spouse, the plan that was approved by the city and implemented for more than twenty years allowed plaintiff to be paid pursuant to a Domestic Relations Order which was in effect as a result of the divorce settle
Publication Date: 2022-09-05
Practice Area: Criminal Law
Industry:
Court: Courts of Common Pleas, Lawrence County
Judge: Judge Hodge
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 22-0902
Court granted defendant's motion in limine in part and denied it in part holding that the state failed to adequately prove defendant drove dangerously while under the influence, evaded an officer, and resisted arrest. The court did however hold that the state had enough evidence to prove that defendant ran a stop sign, but the lack of proof regarding defendant's sobriety at the time of the traffic stop and level of aggression during the arrest was not sufficient enough to sustain charges.
Law Journal Press | Digital Book
Authors: Michael D. Malfitano
View this BookView more book results for the query "*"
Publication Date: 2022-09-05
Practice Area: Criminal Law
Industry:
Court: Courts of Common Pleas, Lawrence County
Judge: Judge Cox
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 22-0903
Court denied the majority of pretrial motions filed by a defendant regarding charges stemming from abusive actions towards his girlfriend, children, and family dog while under the influence of heroin. The court held there was sufficient evidence to deny the majority of habeas petitions filed and further denied motions to suppress, holding that defendant voluntarily confessed to the charges and that that the search of the family home was not unconstitutional due to the girlfriend's consent.
Publication Date: 2022-08-29
Practice Area: Criminal Law
Industry:
Court: Courts of Common Pleas, Lawrence County
Judge: Judge Cox
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 22-0933
The court granted in part and denied in part criminal defendant's motion to suppress evidence. The court denied defendant's motion to suppress an illegally recorded video where defendant was not actually recorded, finding that he did not have standing to make the suppression request. As to defendant's request to suppress evidence seized during a warrant search of his house, the court agreed the affidavit did not have the requisite level of probable cause to justify the search.
Publication Date: 2022-08-29
Practice Area: Personal Injury
Industry: Real Estate | State and Local Government
Court: Courts of Common Pleas, Lawrence County
Judge: Judge Motto
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 22-0876
The defendant township was not a joint tortfeasor with its co-defendants in this suit due to its standing as a governmental agency and concomitant immunity; therefore, the co-defendants could not recover on and thus pursue claims of indemnity or contribution from the township. The court sustained the defendant township's preliminary objections.
Publication Date: 2022-08-22
Practice Area: Criminal Law
Industry:
Court: Courts of Common Pleas, Lawrence County
Judge: Judge Hodge
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 22-0875
Court granted criminal defendant's motion to suppress evidence obtained during a warrantless search of a vehicle. The court noted that although the officer conducting the search had probable cause to search the vehicle for drug paraphernalia, no exigent circumstances existed because the occupants had exited the vehicle and were not able to destroy any potential evidence at the time of the search. Therefore, because the warrantless search was not predicated on both probable cause and exigent circumstances, the search violated defendant
Publication Date: 2022-08-15
Practice Area: Criminal Law
Industry:
Court: Courts of Common Pleas, Lawrence County
Judge: Judge Hodge
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 22-0215
The court refused to suppress evidence of drug sales activity found by police in plain view in defendant's hotel room where police entered the room at defendant's request during a mere encounter, which did not afford defendant any protection upon which he could base a claim of a warrantless search. The court denied defendant's motion to suppress.
Legal Speak is a weekly podcast that makes sense of what’s happening in the legal industry.
1 minute read