Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
16 Pennsylvania opinions name it 2 courts 2004–2023 2 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Pennsylvania courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Giant Food Stores, LLC v. THF Silver Spring Development, LPgreen2 sentences2020Thus, failure to cite authority in support of a claim results in waiver of that argument, Giant Food Stores, LLC v. THF Silver Spring Dev., L.P., 959 A.2d 438, 444 (Pa. Super. 2008), and it is axiomatic that this Court will not develop arguments on behalf of an appellant. 2018Failure to cite authority in support of a claim results in waiver of that argument, Giant Food Stores, LLC v. THF Silver Spring Dev., L.P., 959 A.2d 438, 444 (Pa. Super. 2008), and it is axiomatic that courts will not develop arguments on behalf of a litigant. | 4 | 4 |
Commonwealth v. Loftongreen2 sentences2023Id. 2015Commonwealth v. Thompson, 93 A.3d 478, 490 (Pa. Super. 2014) (quoting Commonwealth v. Lofton, 57 A.3d 1270, 1273 (Pa. Super. 2012)). | 3 | 4 |
Commonwealth v. Freemangreen2 sentences2020S31036/20 evidence, and statement of place of raising or preserving issues, respectively.) See also Commonwealth v. Freeman, 128 A.3d 1231, 1249 (Pa.Super. 2015) (explaining that the failure to develop a legal argument in support of a claim results in waiver of the issue). 2019See Commonwealth v. Freeman, 128 A.3d 1231, 1249 (Pa. Super. 2015) (explaining that the failure to develop a legal argument in support of a claim results in waiver of the issue). | 3 | 3 |
Commonwealth v. Thompsongreen2 sentences2015Commonwealth v. Thompson, 93 A.3d 478, 490 (Pa. Super. 2014) (quoting Commonwealth v. Lofton, 57 A.3d 1270, 1273 (Pa. Super. 2012)). 2014Thompson, 93 A.3d at 490 (quoting Commonwealth v. Lofton, 57 A.3d 1270, 1273 (Pa. Super. 2012)). | 2 | 3 |
J.J. DeLuca Co. v. Toll Naval Associatesgreen2 sentences2019Deluca Co. v. Toll Naval Assocs., 56 A.3d 402, 413 (Pa. Super. 2012) (reiterating that a failure to present any record citation to support a claim results in waiver). 2018Deluca Co. v. Toll Naval Assocs., 56 A.3d 402, 413 (Pa.Super. 2012) (reiterating that a failure to present any record citation to support a claim results in waiver). | 2 | 2 |
Keller v. Meygreen1 sentence2022Accordingly, because this Court “will not develop arguments on the behalf of an appellant,” Keller v. Mey, 67 A.3d 1, 7 (Pa. Super. 2013) (citation omitted), Norton’s failure to cite authority in support of this claim results in waiver. | 1 | 1 |
Commonwealth v. Bryantgreen1 sentence2019Commonwealth v. Bryant, 57 A.3d 191, 196 (Pa. Super. 2012). | 1 | 1 |
Commonwealth v. Browngreen1 sentence2018See Commonwealth v. Bracey, 795 A.2d 935 , 940 n.5 (Pa. 2001) (appellant prohibited from raising new issues or remedying an original brief’s deficient discussions in reply brief).20 20 This Court recently decided Commonwealth v. Darnell Brown, 185 A.3d 316 (Pa. 2018), in which we held autopsy reports are testimonial in nature such that the confrontation clause requires the report’s author be available for cross-examination before it may be admitted as evidence at trial. | 1 | 1 |
Commonwealth v. Braceygreen2 sentences2018See Commonwealth v. Bracey , 568 Pa. 264 , 795 A.2d 935 , 940 n.5 (2001) (appellant prohibited from raising new issues or remedying an original brief's deficient discussions in reply brief). 20 Moreover, appellant failed to raise the separate claim of counsel's ineffectiveness for failing to interview and call Dr. McDonald as a witness in his amended PCRA petition, raising it for the first time in his PCRA petition on remand filed twelve years later. 2018See Commonwealth v. Bracey , 568 Pa. 264 , 795 A.2d 935 , 940 n.5 (2001) (appellant prohibited from raising new issues or remedying an original brief's deficient discussions in reply brief). 20 Moreover, appellant failed to raise the separate claim of counsel's ineffectiveness for failing to interview and call Dr. McDonald as a witness in his amended PCRA petition, raising it for the first time in his PCRA petition on remand filed twelve years later. | 1 | 1 |
Commonwealth v. LaCavagreen2 sentences2004Commonwealth v. LaCava, 542 Pa. 160 , 666 A.2d 221, 235 (1995). 2004Commonwealth v. LaCava, 542 Pa. 160 , 666 A.2d 221, 235 (1995). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Pennsylvania. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||