Filter This View

  • Good Will Hunting Club, Inc. v. Shipman

    Publication Date: 2018-07-10
    Practice Area: Real Estate
    Industry: Entertainment and Leisure
    Court: Courts of Common Pleas, Lycoming County
    Judge: Judge Linhardt
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 18-0775

    Under the doctrine of consentable line, the court determined that a boundary line existed where the parties historically posted "no trespassing" signs, and defendant was bound by his acquiescence regarding the location of the boundary line.

  • CRE/ADC Venture 2013-1, LLC v. Anderson

    Publication Date: 2018-07-10
    Practice Area: Civil Procedure
    Industry:
    Court: Courts of Common Pleas, Carbon County
    Judge: Judge Matika
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 18-0772

    Where the evidence established that defendants executed a business loan agreement and promissory note under seal, the 20-year statute of limitations set forth in 42 Pa.C.S. 5529 for actions brought upon an instrument under seal was applicable to plaintiff's action; therefore, plaintiff's action upon a loan and promissory note was not time-barred. The court denied defendants' petition to open and/or strike a default judgment.

  • Hanrahan v. Bakker

    Publication Date: 2018-07-10
    Practice Area: Family Law
    Industry:
    Court: Supreme Court
    Judge: Justice Baer
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 18-0767

    Courts obligated to consider reasonable needs of children in determining support obligations in high-income cases. Order of the superior court vacated, case remanded.

  • Commonwealth v. Smetana

    Publication Date: 2018-07-10
    Practice Area: Criminal Law
    Industry:
    Court: Superior Court
    Judge: Judge Nichols
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 18-0808

    Trial court erred in imprisoning defendant for contempt for failure to pay court-ordered costs and fines without determining defendant's ability to pay and willful failure to pay. Order of the trial court reversed, case remanded.

  • Heim v. Hope Enter. Found. Inc.

    Publication Date: 2018-07-10
    Practice Area: Health Care Law | Wrongful Death
    Industry: Health Care
    Court: Courts of Common Pleas, Lycoming County
    Judge: Judge Linhardt
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 18-0776

    Group home operators and caretaker were not entitled to summary judgment in this case involving the death of a resident. The court held the jury should determine whether the facts warranted a finding of gross negligence.

  • Hammons v. Ethicon, Inc.

    Publication Date: 2018-07-10
    Practice Area: Products Liability
    Industry: Biotechnology
    Court: Superior Court
    Judge: Judge Stabile
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 18-0769

    Judgment in medical device products liability case affirmed where plaintiff presented expert testimony opining that device's defective design caused her to have post-surgical complications and that manufacturer failed to warn physicians of the high risks of complications. Judgment affirmed.

  • Rothenbecker v. 3M Co.

    Publication Date: 2018-07-10
    Practice Area: Products Liability
    Industry: Manufacturing
    Court: U.S. District Court for Pennsylvania - Middle
    Judge: District Judge Caputo
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 18-0812

    Defendant moved for summary judgment, in plaintiff's action alleging defendant's respirators inadequately protected him from airborne respirable silica, based on defendant's failure to present proof as to the levels of exposure in his work environments but court found that de-fendant cited no authority for such evidence and that there was a material fact in dispute as to whether plaintiff was inadequately protected based on a defect in defendant's respirators. Motion denied.

  • Whitmoyer v. Workers' Compensation Appeal Bd.

    Publication Date: 2018-07-10
    Practice Area: Administrative Law | Employment Litigation
    Industry: Food and Beverage
    Court: Supreme Court
    Judge: Justice Donohue
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 18-0768

    Commonwealth Court erred in its interpretation of §319 because the term "installments of compensation" was clear and unambiguous and did not refer to medical expenses and an employer could not seek reimbursement for future medical expenses from the employee's balance of recovery. Reversed.

  • Lamelza v. Wal-Mart Stores East, LP

    Publication Date: 2018-07-03
    Practice Area: Civil Procedure | Personal Injury
    Industry: Retail
    Court: U.S. District Court for Pennsylvania - Eastern
    Judge: District Judge Brody
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 18-0797

    Plaintiffs' remand motion was granted in their action against store for injuries in store parking lot because store's removal of case to federal court was beyond the 30-days allowed since the §1446(b)(3) exception did not apply where store made the argument that manager named as a defendant was not a proper defendant and did not work at the store in its answer to the state court complaint and the 30 days began to run on the date of the state court answer. Remand granted.

  • Paul Davis Restoration of W. PA, Inc. v. Stoops

    Publication Date: 2018-07-03
    Practice Area: Contractual Disputes
    Industry: Construction
    Court: Courts of Common Pleas, Lawrence County
    Judge: Judge Motto
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 18-0747

    In its statutory lien claim, a contractor did not allege details regarding the nature of the labor and material furnished, so the court sustained defendant's preliminary objection, but it held that a ruling on the vagueness of the contract or the adequacy of consideration on the breach of contract claim was premature.