In Re MK (1994)
green
· 55 citation events
across 2 courts.
Showing the 15 strongest citers on record
(one row per citing case, strongest signal kept).
Treatment trajectory · 1994 → 2026 · click a year to view the case as of then
199420102026
Sort:
By significance ·
Most recent
green
In the Interest of J.M. (1995)
In re M.K., 431 Pa.Super. 198, 203-204 , 636 A.2d 198, 201 (1994), allocatur denied, 537 Pa. 633 , 642 A.2d 486 (1994), quoting In re Frank W.D., supra. See also: In Interest of C.L., 436 Pa.Super. 630 , -, 648 A.2d 799, 802 (1994); In Interest of R.C., 427 Pa.Super. 196, 202 , 628 A.2d 893, 897 (1993); In re B.B., 424 Pa.Super. 399, 405 , 622 A.2d 979, 982-983 (1993).
green
In the Interest of: Z.P., A Minor, Appeal of: L.P. (2016)
In re M.K., 636 A.2d 198, 201 (Pa. Super. 1994). “[E]ven where the facts could support an opposite result, as is often the case in dependency and termination cases, an appellate court must resist the urge to second guess the trial court and impose its own credibility determinations and judgment[.]” In re Adoption of S.P., 47 A.3d 817, 827 (Pa. 2012), ____________________________________________ 4 Frye v. United States, 293 F. 1013 (D.C.Cir.1923) (“Just when a scientific prin…
green
Commonwealth v. Schley (2016)
Schley first argues that “the R[SL], by its plain language, does not apply in a prosecution for endangering the welfare of children!,] and therefore could not operate to exclude evidence within its purview.” Brief for Appellant at 16 (citing In re M.K., 431 Pa.Super. 198 , 636 A.2d 198, 203 (1994) (stating that “[t]he scope of the RSL’s application is limited to criminal prosecutions relating to sexual offenses.”)).
stating that “[t]he scope of the RSL’s application is limited to criminal prosecutions relating to sexual offenses.”
green
Com. v. Bush, C. (2016)
In re M.K., 636 A.2d 198, 201 (Pa.Super. 1994), appeal denied, 537 Pa. 633 , 642 A.2d 486 (1994) (holding trial court’s finding witness testified credibly implies rejection of appellant’s claim that witness’ testimony was fabricated).
green
In the Interest of: Ma.W., a Minor (2015)
Relying on this unique posture, we will not overrule his findings if they are supported by competent evidence." In re M.K., 636 A.2d 198, 201 (Pa. Super.
green
In the Interest of: A.L., Appeal of: A.L. (2014)
As this Court has held, “[i]t is well settled that questions concerning the admission or exclusion of evidence are within the sound discretion of the trial court and will be reversed on appeal only where a clear abuse of that discretion exists.” In re A.H., 763 A.2d 873, 880 (Pa. Super. 2000) (citing In re M.K., 636 A.2d 198, 203 (Pa. Super. 1994)).
green
In re J.J. (2013)
“It is well settled that questions concerning the admission or exclusion of evidence are within the sound discretion of the trial court and will be reversed on appeal only where a clear abuse of that discretion exists.” In re A.H., 763 A.2d 873, 880 (Pa.Super.2000) quoting, In re M.K., 431 Pa.Super. 198 , 636 A.2d 198, 203 (1994).
green
In re D.M. (2010)
(S.M.’s brief at 26.) S.M. relies on In re M.K., 431 Pa.Super. 198 , 636 A.2d 198, 200 (1994), appeal denied, 537 Pa. 633 , 642 A.2d 486 (1994), cert. denied, 513 U.S. 962 , 115 S.Ct. 423 , 130 L.Ed.2d 338 (1994), to support her argument that she should have had standing as the trial court’s dispositional order affected her rights by compelling her to cooperate with CYF, to provide a drug and alcohol evaluation, and to submit to random urine screens.
green
In Re DM (2010)
(S.M.'s brief at 26.) S.M. relies on In re M.K., 431 Pa.Super. 198 , 636 A.2d 198, 200 (1994), appeal denied, 537 Pa. 633 , 642 A.2d 486 (1994), cert. denied, 513 U.S. 962 , 115 S.Ct. 423 , 130 L.Ed.2d 338 (1994), to support her argument that she should have had standing as the trial court's dispositional order affected her rights by compelling her to cooperate with CYF, to provide a drug and alcohol evaluation, and to submit to random urine screens.
green
In re A.H. (2000)
“It is well settled that questions concerning the admission or exclusion of evidence are within the sound discretion of the trial court and will be reversed on appeal only where a clear abuse of that discretion exists.” In re M.K., 431 Pa.Super. 198 , 636 A.2d 198, 203 (1994). ¶ 22 It is clear the court did not abuse its discretion by denying mother’s request for reconsideration or rehearing based upon the alleged testimony of Annette Lewis.
green
In Re AH (2000)
"It is well settled that questions concerning the admission or exclusion of evidence are within the sound discretion of the trial court and will be reversed on appeal only where a clear abuse of that discretion exists." In re M.K., 431 Pa.Super. 198 , 636 A.2d 198, 203 (1994). ¶ 22 It is clear the court did not abuse its discretion by denying mother's request for reconsideration or rehearing based upon the alleged testimony of Annette Lewis.
green
In re Read (1997)
In Interest of J.M., supra at 416, 652 A.2d at 880-881 (quoting In re M.K., 431 Pa.Super. 198, 203-204 , 636 A.2d 198, 201 (1994); In re Frank W.D., 315 Pa.Super. 510, 517 , 462 A.2d 708, 711 (1983)).
green
D.S. v. DePaul Institute (1996)
In re M.K., 431 Pa. Super. 198, 207-208 , 636 A.2d 198, 203 (1994).
green
In re J.M. (1995)
In re M.K., 431 Pa.Super. 198, 203-204 , 636 A.2d 198, 201 (1994), allocatur denied, 537 Pa. 633 , 642 A.2d 486 (1994), quoting In re Frank W.D., supra. See also: In Interest of C.L., 436 Pa.Super. 630, 636 , 648 A.2d 799, 802 (1994); In Interest of R.C., 427 Pa.Super. 196, 202 , 628 A.2d 893, 897 (1993); In re B.B., 424 Pa.Super. 399, 405 , 622 A.2d 979, 982-983 (1993).
green
In Interest of TM (1997)
Id.; see also In re M.K., 431 Pa.Super. 198, 203-04 , 636 A.2d 198, 201 (1994); In the Interest of C.L., 436 Pa.Super. 630, 636 , 648 A.2d 799, 802 (1994); In re B.B., 424 Pa.Super. 399, 405 , 622 A.2d 979, 982-83 (1993).