Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.
Get alerted any time new stories match your search criteria. Create an alert to follow a developing story, keep current on a competitor, or monitor industry news.
Thank You!
Don’t forget you can visit MyAlerts to manage your alerts at any time.
How To Use Search Constraints
Categorical
judge:"Steven Andrews"
court:Florida
topic:"Civil Appeals"
practicearea:Lobbying
Boolean
"Steven Andrews" AND Litigation
"Steven Andrews" OR "Roger Dalton"
Litigation NOT "Roger Dalton"
"Steven Andrews" AND Litigation NOT Florida
Combinations
(Florida OR Georgia) judge:"Steven Andrews"
((Florida AND Georgia) OR Texas) topic:"Civil Appeals"
Addressing an issue of first impression, the court found the evidence insufficient to sustain defendant's conviction for unlawful use of a computer because lay witnesses were not competent to draw conclusions from information in the victim's email account setting that depicted multiple instances of disparate Internet Protocol addresses accessing her account from approximate geographic locations. The appellate court reversed defendant's judgment of sentence and remanded for a new trial.
Publication Date: 2018-05-22 Practice Area:Criminal Law Industry: Court:Superior Court Judge:Judge Bender Attorneys:For plaintiff: for defendant: Case Number: 18-0603
Defendant failed to meet his burden of demonstrating that the trial court sentenced him to a de facto life without parole sentence for crimes committed when he was just a juvenile given the meaningful opportunity for his release from prison at age 60. The appellate court affirmed defendant's judgment of sentence.
Publication Date: 2018-05-15 Practice Area:Criminal Law | Evidence Industry: Court:Superior Court Judge:Judge Ott Attorneys:For plaintiff: for defendant: Case Number: 18-0564
The trial court erred in holding that the commonwealth was required to prove defendant's consent to the recording of his jailhouse conversations under the mutual consent exception to the Wiretapping and Electronic Surveillance Control Act since the exception permits interception when a defendant knew or should have known that his conversations were recorded. The appellate court reversed and remanded.
The trial court lacked subject matter jurisdiction to hear plaintiffs' challenges to defendant's use of eminent domain to construct two natural gas liquid pipelines since the Eminent Domain Code provided the exclusive procedure for challenging defendant's power and right to condemn property under the state and federal constitutions. The court reversed and remanded in part.
The liquor control board did not err or abuse its discretion in granting townships petition for an exemption from the amplified sound re-strictions for a liquor-licensed premises because case law showed that the noise standard in the townships ordinance was not subjective, nothing in the liquor code required a municipalitys noise ordinance to be as restrictive as the amplified sound restrictions in the liquor code and the township and police enforced the noise ordinance regardless of whether complaints were made from within or outs
The court denied defendants' motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict as to punitive damages where plaintiffs introduced competent evidence that the driver of a passenger bus involved in a collision and her employer objectively knew that their actions were placing passengers at a high degree of risk of physical harm or that they consciously elected to disregard such risk. The court recommended affirmance on appeal.
Publication Date: 2018-05-15 Practice Area:Criminal Law Industry: Court:Superior Court Judge:Judge Bowes Attorneys:For plaintiff: for defendant: Case Number: 18-0574
Court affirmed the PCRA court's dismissal of appellant's PCRA petition, alleging his trial counsel was ineffective due to counsel's deteriorated mental state from cocaine use. Affirmed.Court affirmed the PCRA court's dismissal of appellant's PCRA petition, alleging his trial counsel was ineffective due to counsel's deteriorated mental state from cocaine use. Affirmed.
Trial courts preliminary order and decree permitting entry of the divorce decree were proper because husbands challenge to the telephonic testimony of wifes medical expert at the masters hearing failed. Affirmed
Trial court erred in granting judgment on cross-claim where defendants raised genuine issue of additional defendants breach of duties to plaintiffs. Judgment vacated, case remanded.