Filter This View

  • Anderson v. Pennsylvania Parole Bd.

    Publication Date: 2021-11-08
    Practice Area: Criminal Law
    Industry:
    Court: Commonwealth Court
    Judge: Judge Covey
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 21-1300

    Statement that could be reasonably construed as a threat to assault a corrections officer if given the opportunity was properly construed as assaultive behavior that warranted the elimination of offender's automatic reparole. Order of the parole board affirmed.

  • Riley v. Workers' Comp. Appeal Bd.

    Publication Date: 2021-08-23
    Practice Area: Employment Litigation
    Industry: State and Local Government
    Court: Commonwealth Court
    Judge: Judge Covey
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 21-0967

    Board properly found claimant's petition was not timely and she was not entitled to reinstatement of her total disability benefits because Protz II did not apply to her. Affirmed.

  • Jack Lehr Elec. v. Unemployment Comp. Bd. of Review

    Publication Date: 2021-06-21
    Practice Area: Labor Law
    Industry:
    Court: Commonwealth Court
    Judge: Judge Covey
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 21-0708

    Board properly found claimant was not ineligible for benefits under §402(e.1) where claimant tested positive for marijuana in a random drug test after telling employer he had a medical marijuana card and a prescription for medical marijuana from his doctor because employer's drug policy explicitly stated the proper use of prescription medications was exempt from the restrictions in the drug policy. Affirmed.

  • Gates v. City of Pittsburgh Historic Review Comm'n

    Publication Date: 2021-06-21
    Practice Area: Land Use and Planning
    Industry: Real Estate | State and Local Government
    Court: Commonwealth Court
    Judge: Judge Covey
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 21-0707

    Trial court properly found appellants lacked standing to challenge historic district commission's approval of certificate of appropriateness to homeowners to replace windows because appellants failed to establish they were aggrieved since they lacked direct proximity and visibility and suffered no purported harm. Affirmed.

  • DuBoise v. Rumcik

    Publication Date: 2021-06-14
    Practice Area: Health Care Law
    Industry: Health Care | State and Local Government
    Court: Commonwealth Court
    Judge: Judge Covey
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 21-0682

    The Pennsylvania Department of Corrections filed preliminary objections to inmate's petition seeking to compel DOC to provide him with his mental health treatment records under the Medical Records Act and the Mental Health Procedures Act and court granted DOC's preliminary objections to inmate's claim under the MHPA but found it could not declare with certainty that the law would not permit inmate to succeed in his mandamus challenge under the MRA. Preliminary objections overruled and sustained.

  • Law Journal Press | Digital Book

    Florida Construction Defect Litigation 2022

    Authors: Gary L. Brown

    View this Book

    View more book results for the query "*"

  • Brown v. Greene County Office of Dist. Attorney

    Publication Date: 2021-05-31
    Practice Area: Civil Procedure
    Industry:
    Court: Commonwealth Court
    Judge: Judge Covey
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 21-0590

    The commonwealth court lacked jurisdiction to hear this appeal from an unsuccessful request under the Right-to-Know Law where appellant, an incarcerated person, failed to satisfy his burden of demonstrating the timeliness of his notice of appeal. The commonwealth court quashed the appeal for lack of jurisdiction.

  • Pennsylvania Dep't of Transp. v. Bennett Family Prop., LLC

    Publication Date: 2021-05-24
    Practice Area: Real Estate
    Industry: Real Estate | State and Local Government
    Court: Commonwealth Court
    Judge: Judge Covey
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 21-0567

    The trial court properly barred a property owner from offering testimony regarding the highest and best use for its property during the preliminary objection stage of condemnation proceedings as the condemnor was not required to consider such factors as part of its suitable investigation and resulting intelligent, informed judgment. The commonwealth court affirmed the trial court's ruling.

  • Prunty v. Unemployment Comp. Bd. of Review

    Publication Date: 2021-05-17
    Practice Area: Employment Litigation
    Industry: Education
    Court: Commonwealth Court
    Judge: Judge Covey
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 21-0555

    Unemployment compensation board properly held claimant, part-time adjunct instructor, was ineligible for unemployment benefits under §402.1(1) when she was not hired to teach a summer session because the summer term was not a regular term under § 402.1(1). Affirmed.

  • Newman & Co., Inc. v. City of Philadelphia

    Publication Date: 2021-04-19
    Practice Area: Real Estate
    Industry: Manufacturing | State and Local Government
    Court: Commonwealth Court
    Judge: Judge Covey
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 21-0429

    Owner of parcels abutting former railroad right-of-way not entitled to fee simple ownership where fee simple title to the right-of-way had been severed prior to the other parcels being conveyed by their original owner. Order of the trial court affirmed.

  • Bielby v. Zoning Bd. of Adjustment of the City of Philadelphia

    Publication Date: 2021-04-19
    Practice Area: Land Use and Planning
    Industry: State and Local Government
    Court: Commonwealth Court
    Judge: Judge Covey
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 21-0424

    Trial court erred in sanctioning appellants for ex parte communications allegedly intended to circumvent the trial court's order where appellants were not litigants before the court at the time of the communications and where plaintiff had withdrawn his motion to enforce the trial court's order and the trial court then denied appellants due process before sanctioning them for contempt. Order of the trial court vacated.