Commonwealth v. Mendez, 111 A.3d 1187 (Pa. 2015). · Go Syfert
Search
Commonwealth v. Mendez, 111 A.3d 1187 (Pa. 2015). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
G Cite
cited 3× by 3 distinct cases · …if a term is clear and unambiguous, we are prohibited from assigning a meaning to that term that differs from its common everyday usage for the purpose of effectuating the legislature's intent. at p. 1189 ⚠ not in text Topic ↗
11 citation events (11 in the last 25 years) across 2 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Com. v. Knight, A. (pasuperct, 2025-11-17)
Top citers, strongest first. 6 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Com. v. Knight, A.
Pa. Super. Ct. · 2025 · confidence medium
See Commonwealth v. Borrin, 80 A.3d 1219 , 1224 n.10 (Pa. 2013) (“In every case, what is actually decided is the law applicable to the particular facts; all other conclusions are but obiter dicta.” (citation and brackets omitted)); Commonwealth v. Jackson, 111 A.3d 1187, 1190 (Pa. Super. 2015) (citing Borrin and stating dicta “is not binding”).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Reibenstein, L. v. Barax, C., M.D.
Pa. Super. Ct. · 2020 · confidence medium
Hence, “if a term is clear and unambiguous, we are prohibited from assigning a meaning to that term that differs from its common everyday usage for the purpose of effectuating the legislature’s intent.” Commonwealth v. Jackson, 111 A.3d 1187, 1189 (Pa.Super. 2015) (citation omitted).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Reibenstein, L. v. Barax, C., M.D.
Pa. Super. Ct. · 2020 · confidence medium
Hence, “if a term is clear and unambiguous, we are prohibited from assigning a meaning to that term that differs from its common everyday usage for the purpose of effectuating the legislature’s intent.” Commonwealth v. Jackson, 111 A.3d 1187, 1189 (Pa.Super. 2015) (citation omitted).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Reibenstein, L. v. Barax, C., M.D.
Pa. Super. Ct. · 2020 · confidence medium
Hence, “if a term is clear and unambiguous, we are prohibited from assigning a meaning to that term that differs from its common everyday usage for the purpose of effectuating the legislature’s intent.” Commonwealth v. Jackson, 111 A.3d 1187, 1189 (Pa.Super. 2015) (citation omitted).
cited Cited "see" Com. v. Brake, K.
Pa. Super. Ct. · 2016 · signal: see · confidence high
See Commonwealth v. Jackson, 111 A.3d 1187, 1188-89 (Pa. Super. 2015), appeal denied, 125 A.3d 1199 (Pa. 2015); Commonwealth v. Parham, 969 A.2d 629, 634 (Pa. Super. 2009).
cited Cited "see" Com. v. Caceres, A.
Pa. Super. Ct. · 2015 · signal: see · confidence high
See Commonwealth v. Mendez, 111 A.3d 1187 (Pa. March 30, 2015). -6- J-S34024-15 in place when the act occurred.’”) (emphasis in original), appeal granted, 95 A.3d 274 (Pa. 2014).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
COMMONWEALTH of Pennsylvania
v.
David C. MENDEZ
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania.
Mar 30, 2015.
111 A.3d 1187
2015 Pa. LEXIS 679
Karl Baker, Esq., Robin S. Forrest, Esq., Defender Association of Philadelphia, for David C. Mendez., Hugh J. Burns, Jr., Esq., James Foster Gibbons, Esq., Philadelphia District Attorney’s Office, for Commonwealth of Pennsylvania.
Cited by 3 opinions  |  Published

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

AND NOW, this 30th day of March, 2015, the appeal is dismissed as having been IMPROVIDENTLY GRANTED.