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"
Trial court properly dismissed appellants complaint asserting that a 2001 deed was void ab initio and asserting malpractice, negligence and fraud because the deed was not forged, appellants signed a deed without knowing its contents and did not act with reasonable diligence to discover what they had signed when they took no action for 14 years. Affirmed.
Motion to suppress evidence from warrantless search properly denied where parole officers had reasonable suspicion to search parolees person and vehicle due to corroborated tip that parolee possessed an internet-capable smartphone in violation of his parole, and where parolee expressly consented to search. Judgment of sentence affirmed.
The defendant insurer had no duty to defend or indemnify plaintiff in an underlying personal injury action arising out of an assault and battery on plaintiffs premises where plaintiffs insurance policy excluded from coverage any assault and/or battery committed by any person whatsoever on the premises, even where styled as a negligence claim. The court granted the defendant insurer summary judgment.
The court granted plaintiffs motion for summary judgment against an insurer in this case involving replacement cost coverage, because Pennsylvania law required the insurer to include general contractor overhead and profit in actual cash value payments when use of a general contractor was reasonably likely to be necessary in repairing damages to a home.
The trial court properly convicted defendant of contempt for violating a protection from abuse order where the evidence supported a finding that his intentional actions in twisting his wifes fingers to the point of injury rose to the level of abuse. The court affirmed defendants judgment of sentence.
A defendant subject to a Protection from Abuse order was guilty of indirect criminal contempt where he was aware that a firearm was stored in an outbuilding to which he had access.
A zoning board abused its discretion when it denied an application based on a special exception, because the applicant provided expert testimony to support its proposed use, and objectors relied solely on lay opinions.
Publication Date: 2018-01-09 Practice Area:Criminal Law Industry: Court:Superior Court Judge:Judge Ransom Attorneys:For plaintiff: for defendant: Case Number: 17-1896
While defendant demonstrated recklessness in driving at an excessive rate during a drag race, there was no evidence of the sustained, purposeful recklessness necessary to prove a knowing and conscious disregard that death or serious bodily injury was reasonably certain to occur necessary to support his four convictions for murder in the third degree. The appellate court reversed defendants convictions in part.
Publication Date: 2018-01-09 Practice Area:Criminal Law Industry: Court:Superior Court Judge:Judge Solano Attorneys:For plaintiff: for defendant: Case Number: 17-1898
The record did not support defendants conviction for disorderly conduct based on her angry use of the f-word or her conviction for possession of a dangerous weapon in a court facility, as her pocketknife did not constitute a dangerous weapon for purposes of 18 Pa.C.S. §913(a)(1). The appellate court vacated defendants judgment of sentence.
Trial court properly refused to compel police pension fund to pay survivors benefits to appellant after Orphans Court ruled that she was deceaseds common-law wife because the fund plan mandated exhaustion of contractual remedies, appellant did not appeal the funds prior adjudication that she did not prove the marriage and the plan decision was final and binding.