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"
Evidence of prior convictions admitted where offenses related directly to the offenders abilities to be truthful, such that their probative value outweighed the prejudicial effect arising from the convictions remoteness. Parties motions to introduce evidence of prior convictions granted.
In the absence of a timely appeal from an arbitrators award, the trial court lacked jurisdiction to consider plaintiffs subsequent motion for costs and prejudgment interest upon the award granted them at arbitration. The appellate court reversed a trial court order and reinstated an arbitration award.
For-profit purchaser of tax exempt property obligated to pay property taxes from date of purchase pursuant to PILOT agreement with taxing authority. Order of the trial court affirmed.
While defendants acted pro se in filing a petition to open a default judgment, they were still required to follow the proper procedures for such a petition, set for in Pa.R.Civ.P. 237.3, and their failure to do so barred the court from granting relief. The court denied defendants petition to open a default judgment.
Publication Date: 2018-02-27 Practice Area:Family Law Industry: Court:Superior Court Judge:Judge Bowes Attorneys:For plaintiff: for defendant: Case Number: 18-0206
Trial court erred in relinquishing jurisdiction over custody litigation to another state, where trial court failed to provide parties with notice and record of conversations between trial courts and denied parties opportunity to submit facts and legal argument on the issue of jurisdiction. Orders of the trial court reversed, case remanded.
The court dismissed plaintiffs RICO claims as insufficiently pled and declined to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over plaintiffs state law claims in plaintiffs action asserting that soccer club and stadium management conspired with police chief and bribed police chief to close plaintiffs parking lots on game days because plaintiffs did not state a claim for extortion under color of state law and failed to plead mail or wire fraud with sufficient particularity as to the circumstances. Motion granted.
The trial court properly found that the parties promissory notes, which contained a single reference to their intent to create a sealed instrument buried in a waiver paragraph, were insufficient to presumptively create a sealed instrument and, thus, the 20-year statute of limitations for instruments in writing under seal in 42 Pa.C.S. §5529(b)(1) did not apply. The appellate court affirmed trial court orders striking judgments of confession.
The court granted the governors motion to quash petitioners subpoena in their action challenging a congressional redistricting plan because the chief executive privilege implicated higher or greater separation of powers issues than those encompassed in the lesser executive and deliberative process privileges. Motion granted.
The court found that the absolute privilege in the speech and debate clause, Art. 2, §15 of the Pennsylvania constitution, applied to subpoenas seeking information from legislative respondents and their staff about the 2011 reapportionment of Pennsylvanias congressional seats. Motion granted.
The Philadelphia Parking Authority was not liable to Philadelphia taxicab medallion holders under the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution for their loss of income caused by the authoritys alleged failure to combat transportation network companies such as Uber and Lyft. The court granted the parking authoritys motion for summary judgment.