Don’t forget you can visit MyAlerts to manage your alerts at any time.
68 results for '* judge:"Justice Mundy"' You can use Search Constraints to get even better search results
Publication Date: 2019-08-05
Practice Area: Labor Law
Industry: State and Local Government
Court: Supreme Court
Judge: Justice Mundy
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 19-0906
Because the Municipalities Planning Code did not expressly establish that zoning officers were required to direct the implementation of policy or could exercise independent discretion to implement policy, a municipality could not withdraw the zoning officer from the collective bargaining unit where it failed to present evidence of actual job duties. Order of the commonwealth court reversed.
Publication Date: 2019-08-05
Practice Area: Real Estate
Industry: State and Local Government
Court: Supreme Court
Judge: Justice Mundy
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 19-0900
In this case of first impression, the high court concluded that petitioners' proposed new use of their parcel for a seasonal cabin did not meet the requisite "strictest necessity" to justify taking a portion of a neighboring property under the Private Road Act where they had adequate access to their property for the existing use. The high court reversed the commonwealth court's ruling.
Publication Date: 2019-07-01
Practice Area: Civil Procedure
Industry: Health Care | Legal Services
Court: Supreme Court
Judge: Justice Mundy
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 19-0739
The high court concluded that remand was necessary for application of a newly articulated work product waiver analysis providing that the attorney work product doctrine is not waived by disclosure unless the alleged work product is disclosed to an adversary or disclosed in a manner that significantly increases the likelihood that an adversary/anticipated adversary will obtain such disclosure. The high court affirmed in part, reversed in part and remanded.
Publication Date: 2019-06-24
Practice Area: Public Utilities
Industry: Energy | State and Local Government
Court: Supreme Court
Judge: Justice Mundy
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 19-0719
A $1.8 million penalty imposed upon electricity supplier was affirmed where supplier waived constitutional challenge by failing to timely raise the issue and where intentional overcharging of customers provided substantial evidence to support size of penalty.
Publication Date: 2019-06-24
Practice Area: Election and Political Law
Industry:
Court: Supreme Court
Judge: Justice Mundy
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 19-0724
Commonwealth court properly found that challenged anti-fusion provisions of the election code did not violate the equal protection clause of the United States constitution or Art. 1, §§5, 7, and 20 of the Pennsylvania constitution. Affirmed.
Law Journal Press | Digital Book
Authors: Shari L. Klevens, Alanna G. Clair
View this BookView more book results for the query "*"
Publication Date: 2019-05-13
Practice Area: Criminal Law
Industry:
Court: Supreme Court
Judge: Justice Mundy
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 19-0549
The superior court erred in holding that the trial court's failure to address the factors set forth in Miller v. Alabama on record was moot, as a court sentencing a juvenile for a crime for which life without parole is an available sentence must review on record the Miller factors, regardless of whether the defendant is ultimately sentenced to life without parole. The high court vacated defendant's judgment of sentence and remanded.
Publication Date: 2019-04-08
Practice Area: Constitutional Law | Criminal Law
Industry:
Court: Supreme Court
Judge: Justice Mundy
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 19-0389
Denial of Atkins claim vacated where PCRA court erroneously relied upon lay family members' failure to intervene as evidence of defendant's lack of functional problems and where PCRA court failed to explain credibility and factual determinations of competing expert testimony. Order of the PCRA court vacated and remanded.
Publication Date: 2019-03-04
Practice Area: Real Estate
Industry: State and Local Government
Court: Supreme Court
Judge: Justice Mundy
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 19-0239
Commonwealth court properly reversed the trial court's denial of appellees' petition for an evidentiary hearing in a condemnation case even though the time for filing preliminary objections had passed because DOT misled appellees by inadequately identifying the extent or effect of the taking and denied them the opportunity to secure just compensation. Affirmed.
Publication Date: 2018-12-04
Practice Area: Criminal Law
Industry: Legal Services
Court: Supreme Court
Judge: Justice Mundy
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 18-1438
PCRA petition raising claims of trial error was properly dismissed as waived or previously litigated, where appellant's claim that standby direct appeal counsel usurped or unduly interfered with appellant's self-representation on appeal was unsupported by record evidence showing appellant acquiesced to counsel's assistance. Order of the PCRA court affirmed.
Publication Date: 2018-12-04
Practice Area: Civil Appeals | Damages
Industry: Retail
Court: Supreme Court
Judge: Justice Mundy
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 18-1451
Superior court erred in granting defendant a new trial on damages in plaintiff's negligence action because defendant's challenge was not grounded in the weight of the evidence but was a challenge to the jury verdict, which defendant waived by failing to object before the trial court dismissed the jury. Reversed.
Legal Speak is a weekly podcast that makes sense of what’s happening in the legal industry.
1 minute read