Filter This View

  • Commonwealth v. Simpson

    Publication Date: 2018-05-29
    Practice Area: Criminal Law
    Industry:
    Court: Courts of Common Pleas, Delaware County
    Judge: Judge Dozor
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 18-0597

    The court properly suppressed evidence where police failed to conduct any investigation that could have provided a reasonable suspicion that defendant was the operator of a motor vehicle at the time of an accident.

  • Bd. of Supervisors of Willistown Twp. v. Main Line Gardens, Inc. et al

    Publication Date: 2018-05-29
    Practice Area: Civil Procedure | Land Use and Planning
    Industry:
    Court: Commonwealth Court
    Judge: Judge Simpson
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 18-0624

    The trial court did not err in finding the res judicata defense unavailing to respondent, who was named in multiple zoning enforcement actions, since each of the seven enforcement actions covered a different period and, thus, the requisite identities were not present. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's decision.

  • Toner v. Malik

    Publication Date: 2018-05-29
    Practice Area: Real Estate
    Industry: Real Estate
    Court: Courts of Common Pleas, Monroe County
    Judge: Judge Zulick
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 18-0595

    Purchasers of real property were not entitled to rescission due to mutual mistake because they had the right to inspect the property and could have discovered issues regarding access and acreage prior to closing. Allegations regarding statements by the seller's agents were sufficient to allow the fraud and negligent misrepresentation claims to go forward.

  • VS Construction Services, LLC v. Main St. American Assurance Co., I.J.S., Inc. et al

    Publication Date: 2018-05-29
    Practice Area: Insurance Law | Personal Injury
    Industry: Construction | Insurance
    Court: Courts of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County
    Judge: Judge Glazer
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 18-0584

    Defendant insurer had a duty to defend a construction contractor in an underlying personal injury action where the contractor was a named insured under subcontractor's liability insurance policy and the complaint in the underlying suit comprehended an injury that was actually or potentially within the scope of that policy. The court granted plaintiff's motion for partial summary judgment.

  • McNamara v. Susquehanna County

    Publication Date: 2018-05-29
    Practice Area: Civil Rights | Damages | Labor Law
    Industry: State and Local Government
    Court: U.S. District Court for Pennsylvania - Middle
    Judge: District Judge Saporito
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 18-0636

    Defendants were entitled to partial dismissal of plaintiff's gender discrimination, retaliation and hostile work environment claims because Title VII did not impose liability on individuals and punitive damages were not available under PHRA or Title VII if the employer was a municipality but plaintiff did plausibly state a claim for constructive discharge. Motion granted in part and denied in part.

  • Gilyard v. Dusak

    Publication Date: 2018-05-29
    Practice Area: Civil Rights | Constitutional Law
    Industry: State and Local Government
    Court: U.S. District Court for Pennsylvania - Eastern
    Judge: District Judge Kearney
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 18-0632

    Fourteenth Amendment due process claim barred by qualified immunity where no clearly established constitutional right to be free from malicious prosecution. Defendants' motion for judgment on the pleadings granted.

  • Trigg v. Children's Hosp. of Pittsburgh of UPMC

    Publication Date: 2018-05-29
    Practice Area: Civil Procedure
    Industry: Health Care
    Court: Superior Court
    Judge: Judge Kunselman
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 18-0620

    Trial judge was not entitled to the deference standard announced in McHugh v. Proctor & Gamble, 776 A.2d 266 in appellants' challenge to a jury selection process that involved the voir dire questioning of potential jurors outside the presence of the trial judge because it was essential that a judge personally witness voir dire and the failure to do so in this case was reversible error since it forced appellants to exhaust their peremptory challenges. Judgment vacated and case remanded.

  • City of Harrisburg v. Prince

    Publication Date: 2018-05-29
    Practice Area: Discovery
    Industry: State and Local Government
    Court: Commonwealth Court
    Judge: Judge Wojcik
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 18-0626

    The trial court did not err in finding that a spreadsheet containing information about donors to a City of Harrisburg fund set up to defray legal expenses associated with defending local firearm ordinances was not a "financial record" under the Right-to-Know Law and, thus, the spreadsheet was exempt from disclosure under the law's donor exception. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's order.

  • White v. The Home Depot, Inc.

    Publication Date: 2018-05-29
    Practice Area: Products Liability
    Industry: Manufacturing | Retail
    Court: U.S. District Court for Pennsylvania - Eastern
    Judge: District Judge Leeson
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 18-0639

    Defendants moved for summary judgment in plaintiff's action for strict liability, negligence and breach of warranty for his fall off a ladder while painting his bathroom because plaintiff failed to produce sufficient evidence to allow a jury to conclude that the ladder was defective since plaintiff never explained why the existing warning about not placing the ladder on an unstable or slippery surface was not sufficient. Motion granted.

  • Commonwealth v. Davis

    Publication Date: 2018-05-29
    Practice Area: Criminal Law
    Industry:
    Court: Superior Court
    Judge: Judge Kunselman
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 18-0622

    When the trial court found that police had probable cause to conduct a warrantless search of defendant's vehicle, it failed to consider the totality of the circumstances, including several facts that weighed heavily against the conclusion that probable cause existed. The appellate court reversed defendant's judgment of sentence and remanded.