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"
Defendant moved to exclude evidence found inside his car's battery and court found the search of the battery violated defendant's Fourth Amendment rights but court declined to suppress the evidence because officers acted in good faith. Motion denied.
The trial court served notice that its Jan. 10, 2023 order granting appellants' appeal would serve as its §1925(a) opinion in the case in which intervening appellee Ganos, LLC unsuccessfully sought to subdivide one parcel with conforming structures into two lots with nonconforming structures including a flag lot 15 feet wide that did not meet the minimum lot width restriction of 75 feet as required within Philadelphia Zoning Code §§14-701-1 et seq.
Superior court properly found that KEM's accounting claim relating to an oil and gas lease payment was a statutory claim for an accounting between co-tenants under 68 P.S. §101 and the statute of limitations for such a claim was six years. Affirmed.
Appellant homeowners appealed appellee Hamilton Township Zoning Hearing Board's denial of their application to permit short-term rentals of their as a nonconforming use. Appeal denied.
Publication Date: 2024-03-15 Practice Area:Criminal Law Industry: Court:Supreme Court Judge:Justice Brobson Attorneys:For plaintiff: for defendant: Case Number: 6 EAP 2023
Post Conviction Relief Act courts should stay rather than dismiss timely petitions filed during the pendency of a facially untimely direct appeal pending resolution of the timeliness of the direct appeal, as such resolution was necessary to determine whether the PCRA court had jurisdiction. Order of the superior court reversed, case remanded.
Court declined plaintiff's motion to proceed anonymously to prevent his current employer from learning of his chronic health condition, where plaintiff's claimed fears were largely economic in nature and required the unreasonable assumption that plaintiff's employer would break the law by terminating him due to his disability. Plaintiff's motion to proceed anonymously and seal the record denied.
Defendant landlord moved to dismiss plaintiff tenant's discrimination and retaliation claims based on disability, failure to accommodate and the Fair Housing Act and court found plaintiff offered little more than conclusory allegations, apartment complex was not a place of public accommodation within the Americans with Disabilities Act and court dismissed the ADA claims with prejudice and granted leave to amend the FHA claims. Motion granted.
Appellant challenged an involuntary commitment order and court found there was sufficient evidence in the record to justify orphans' court's finding that appellant should be involuntarily committed, despite appellant's threat being silent as to exactly when he was going to shoot his stepbrother. Affirmed.
Publication Date: 2024-03-15 Practice Area:Family Law Industry: Court:Superior Court Judge:Judge Dubow Attorneys:For plaintiff: for defendant: Case Number: 855 WDA 2023
Grandparents' supervised physical custody was insufficient to constitute "physical custody" giving them the status of a "person acting as a parent" and thus their residency in Pennsylvania was insufficient to confer continuing jurisdiction over the custody matter to the Pennsylvania courts. Order of the trial court affirmed.
Plaintiff filed an action to eject defendant from residential real property. The court granted an order of ejectment where defendant and his family entered the unoccupied property as squatters and had no legal right to remain in possession of the premises.