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.
13 Pennsylvania opinions name it 3 courts 1915–2025 5 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 |
|---|---|---|
Commonwealth v. Champneygreen1 sentence2025See Commonwealth v. Dickerson, 900 A.2d 407, 411 (Pa. Super. 2006) (holding that a speculative claim regarding the existence of favorable information did not state a time bar -8- J-S41040-24 exception for governmental interference); cf. Commonwealth v. Champney, 832 A.2d 403, 412 (Pa. 2003) (noting that a “mere assumption” is insufficient to establish that an agreement existed). 6 Thus, we affirm the PCRA court’s conclusion that Tomlin did not establish a timeliness exception under section 9545(b)(1)(i) for governmental interference. | 1 | 1 |
Commonwealth v. Dickersongreen1 sentence2025See Commonwealth v. Dickerson, 900 A.2d 407, 411 (Pa. Super. 2006) (holding that a speculative claim regarding the existence of favorable information did not state a time bar -8- J-S41040-24 exception for governmental interference); cf. Commonwealth v. Champney, 832 A.2d 403, 412 (Pa. 2003) (noting that a “mere assumption” is insufficient to establish that an agreement existed). 6 Thus, we affirm the PCRA court’s conclusion that Tomlin did not establish a timeliness exception under section 9545(b)(1)(i) for governmental interference. | 1 | 1 |
Commonwealth v. Lawrencegreen1 sentence2022See Commonwealth v. Lawrence, 165 A.3d 34, 48 (Pa. Super. 2017) (holding that where an “underlying … allegation is unsupported by any evidence of record and is, instead, based on mere speculation, we deem it, and the ineffectiveness claims premised upon it, - 21 - J-S12008-22 meritless”). | 1 | 1 |
Commonwealth v. Roneygreen1 sentence2022See, e.g., Commonwealth v. Roney, 79 A.3d 595, 604-605 (Pa. 2013) (defendant must proffer evidence to support a PCRA claim to be entitled to a hearing; an evidentiary hearing is not a fishing expedition to support a speculative claim). | 1 | 1 |
In Re Caingreen1 sentence2021See In re Cain, 590 A.2d 291, 292 (Pa. 1991) (“It is - 11 - J-S10039-21 a well-established principle of law that this Court will not decide moot questions.”).8 As for whether Act 21 is unconstitutional on its face because it could result in an individual spending a lifetime in treatment, this appears to merely be an argument that Act 21 is excessive, which In re H.R. necessarily considered in reaching its holding. | 1 | 1 |
Printed Image of York, Inc. v. Mifflin Press, Ltd.green1 sentence2016See Printed Image, 133 A.3d at 59 (citation omitted). | 1 | 1 |
Commonwealth v. Sepulvedagreen2 sentences2015See Commonwealth v. Sepulveda, 618 Pa. 262, 303 , 55 A.3d 1108, 1133 (2012)(counsel cannot be deemed ineffective for failing to raise the speculative claim appellant now faults him for). 2015See Commonwealth v. Sepulveda, 618 Pa. 262, 303 , 55 A.3d 1108, 1133 (2012)(counsel cannot be deemed ineffective for failing to raise the speculative claim appellant now faults him for). | 1 | 1 |
Commonwealth v. Hentoshgreen2 sentences1996Jones, supra; Commonwealth v. Baker, 531 Pa. 541, 562 , 614 A.2d 663, 674 (1992); Commonwealth v. Hutchinson, 521 Pa. 482, 486 , 556 A.2d 370, 372 (1989); Commonwealth v. Hentosh, 520 Pa. 325, 334 , 554 A.2d 20, 25 (1989); Commonwealth v. McNeil, 506 Pa. 607, 615-16 , 487 A.2d 802, 806 (1985); Commonwealth v. Pettus, 492 Pa. 558, 563 , 424 A.2d 1332,1335 (1981). 1996Jones, supra; Commonwealth v. Baker, 531 Pa. 541, 562 , 614 A.2d 663, 674 (1992); Commonwealth v. Hutchinson, 521 Pa. 482, 486 , 556 A.2d 370, 372 (1989); Commonwealth v. Hentosh, 520 Pa. 325, 334 , 554 A.2d 20, 25 (1989); Commonwealth v. McNeil, 506 Pa. 607, 615-16 , 487 A.2d 802, 806 (1985); Commonwealth v. Pettus, 492 Pa. 558, 563 , 424 A.2d 1332,1335 (1981). | 1 | 1 |
Commonwealth v. Pettusgreen2 sentences1996Jones, supra; Commonwealth v. Baker, 531 Pa. 541, 562 , 614 A.2d 663, 674 (1992); Commonwealth v. Hutchinson, 521 Pa. 482, 486 , 556 A.2d 370, 372 (1989); Commonwealth v. Hentosh, 520 Pa. 325, 334 , 554 A.2d 20, 25 (1989); Commonwealth v. McNeil, 506 Pa. 607, 615-16 , 487 A.2d 802, 806 (1985); Commonwealth v. Pettus, 492 Pa. 558, 563 , 424 A.2d 1332,1335 (1981). 1996Jones, supra; Commonwealth v. Baker, 531 Pa. 541, 562 , 614 A.2d 663, 674 (1992); Commonwealth v. Hutchinson, 521 Pa. 482, 486 , 556 A.2d 370, 372 (1989); Commonwealth v. Hentosh, 520 Pa. 325, 334 , 554 A.2d 20, 25 (1989); Commonwealth v. McNeil, 506 Pa. 607, 615-16 , 487 A.2d 802, 806 (1985); Commonwealth v. Pettus, 492 Pa. 558, 563 , 424 A.2d 1332,1335 (1981). | 1 | 1 |
Commonwealth v. McNeilgreen2 sentences1996Jones, supra; Commonwealth v. Baker, 531 Pa. 541, 562 , 614 A.2d 663, 674 (1992); Commonwealth v. Hutchinson, 521 Pa. 482, 486 , 556 A.2d 370, 372 (1989); Commonwealth v. Hentosh, 520 Pa. 325, 334 , 554 A.2d 20, 25 (1989); Commonwealth v. McNeil, 506 Pa. 607, 615-16 , 487 A.2d 802, 806 (1985); Commonwealth v. Pettus, 492 Pa. 558, 563 , 424 A.2d 1332,1335 (1981). 1996Jones, supra; Commonwealth v. Baker, 531 Pa. 541, 562 , 614 A.2d 663, 674 (1992); Commonwealth v. Hutchinson, 521 Pa. 482, 486 , 556 A.2d 370, 372 (1989); Commonwealth v. Hentosh, 520 Pa. 325, 334 , 554 A.2d 20, 25 (1989); Commonwealth v. McNeil, 506 Pa. 607, 615-16 , 487 A.2d 802, 806 (1985); Commonwealth v. Pettus, 492 Pa. 558, 563 , 424 A.2d 1332,1335 (1981). | 1 | 1 |
Commonwealth v. Bakergreen2 sentences1996Jones, supra; Commonwealth v. Baker, 531 Pa. 541, 562 , 614 A.2d 663, 674 (1992); Commonwealth v. Hutchinson, 521 Pa. 482, 486 , 556 A.2d 370, 372 (1989); Commonwealth v. Hentosh, 520 Pa. 325, 334 , 554 A.2d 20, 25 (1989); Commonwealth v. McNeil, 506 Pa. 607, 615-16 , 487 A.2d 802, 806 (1985); Commonwealth v. Pettus, 492 Pa. 558, 563 , 424 A.2d 1332,1335 (1981). 1996Jones, supra; Commonwealth v. Baker, 531 Pa. 541, 562 , 614 A.2d 663, 674 (1992); Commonwealth v. Hutchinson, 521 Pa. 482, 486 , 556 A.2d 370, 372 (1989); Commonwealth v. Hentosh, 520 Pa. 325, 334 , 554 A.2d 20, 25 (1989); Commonwealth v. McNeil, 506 Pa. 607, 615-16 , 487 A.2d 802, 806 (1985); Commonwealth v. Pettus, 492 Pa. 558, 563 , 424 A.2d 1332,1335 (1981). | 1 | 1 |
Commonwealth v. Hutchinsongreen2 sentences1996Jones, supra; Commonwealth v. Baker, 531 Pa. 541, 562 , 614 A.2d 663, 674 (1992); Commonwealth v. Hutchinson, 521 Pa. 482, 486 , 556 A.2d 370, 372 (1989); Commonwealth v. Hentosh, 520 Pa. 325, 334 , 554 A.2d 20, 25 (1989); Commonwealth v. McNeil, 506 Pa. 607, 615-16 , 487 A.2d 802, 806 (1985); Commonwealth v. Pettus, 492 Pa. 558, 563 , 424 A.2d 1332,1335 (1981). 1996Jones, supra; Commonwealth v. Baker, 531 Pa. 541, 562 , 614 A.2d 663, 674 (1992); Commonwealth v. Hutchinson, 521 Pa. 482, 486 , 556 A.2d 370, 372 (1989); Commonwealth v. Hentosh, 520 Pa. 325, 334 , 554 A.2d 20, 25 (1989); Commonwealth v. McNeil, 506 Pa. 607, 615-16 , 487 A.2d 802, 806 (1985); Commonwealth v. Pettus, 492 Pa. 558, 563 , 424 A.2d 1332,1335 (1981). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Pennsylvania. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Commonwealth v. Reid, A., Aplt
green
1 sentence2021Id. at 11- 13. | 1 | 2021–2021 |
Commonwealth v. Scott
green
1 sentence2018Id. at 827-828 (citing Commonwealth v. Scott, 752 A.2d 871 , 877 n. 8 (Pa. 2000)). | 1 | 2018–2018 |
Commonwealth v. Castro
green
1 sentence2018Id. at 827-828 (citing Commonwealth v. Scott, 752 A.2d 871 , 877 n. 8 (Pa. 2000)). | 1 | 2018–2018 |
In the Interest of Lilley
green
2 sentences2014Addressing this assertion would appears to relate to the speculative claim that Mother would allow Father to Id. his thorough research has failed to uncover any case in which the Commonwealth has sought termination of a non- Id. its ruling. 2014Addressing this assertion would appears to relate to the speculative claim that Mother would allow Father to Id. his thorough research has failed to uncover any case in which the Commonwealth has sought termination of a non- Id. its ruling. | 1 | 2014–2014 |
Beck v. Maximus, Inc.
green
1 sentence2007Beck, 457 F.3d at 301 . | 1 | 2007–2007 |
Union National Bank v. Franklin National Bank
neutral
1 sentence1916Bk., 249 Pa. 375, 389 , reviewing these cases, we said “the depositor was bound to give immediate notice of the forgery, and that the courts would not enter upon a speculative inquiry as to whether the bank could have bettered its condition if prompt notice had been given.” While, perhaps, in the last case the use of the word “prompt” might have been more suitable than “immediate,” yet in McNeely Co. v. Bank, supra, at p. 594, we said it was the duty of a depositor to send notice of a forgery to the bank “at once.” On the foregoing authorities, it is clear that the plaintiff failed in his duty | 1 | 1916–1916 |
McNeely Co. v. Bank of North America
green
1 sentence1915In McNeely Co. v. Bank of North America, 221 Pa. 588 , which was a suit by a depositor against the bank to recover the amount of a check paid on a forged endorsement, we recently said (p. 593) : “The right of a bank to recover from a forger, or from those to whom it may have paid a check bearing the forged signature of one of its depositors, or a forged endorsement, is its only remedy for the .fraud practiced upon it by the forgery”; wherefore, we held the depositor was bound to give immediate notice to the bank of the forgery, and that the courts would not enter upon a speculative inquiry as | 1 | 1915–1915 |
Lesley v. Ewing
neutral
1 sentence1915In McNeely Co. v. Bank of North America, 221 Pa. 588 , which was a suit by a depositor against the bank to recover the amount of a check paid on a forged endorsement, we recently said (p. 593) : “The right of a bank to recover from a forger, or from those to whom it may have paid a check bearing the forged signature of one of its depositors, or a forged endorsement, is its only remedy for the .fraud practiced upon it by the forgery”; wherefore, we held the depositor was bound to give immediate notice to the bank of the forgery, and that the courts would not enter upon a speculative inquiry as | 1 | 1915–1915 |
Connors v. Old Forge Discount & Deposit Bank
neutral
1 sentence1915In McNeely Co. v. Bank of North America, 221 Pa. 588 , which was a suit by a depositor against the bank to recover the amount of a check paid on a forged endorsement, we recently said (p. 593) : “The right of a bank to recover from a forger, or from those to whom it may have paid a check bearing the forged signature of one of its depositors, or a forged endorsement, is its only remedy for the .fraud practiced upon it by the forgery”; wherefore, we held the depositor was bound to give immediate notice to the bank of the forgery, and that the courts would not enter upon a speculative inquiry as | 1 | 1915–1915 |
Lesley v. Ewing
green
1 sentence1915In McNeely Co. v. Bank of North America, 221 Pa. 588 , which was a suit by a depositor against the bank to recover the amount of a check paid on a forged endorsement, we recently said (p. 593) : “The right of a bank to recover from a forger, or from those to whom it may have paid a check bearing the forged signature of one of its depositors, or a forged endorsement, is its only remedy for the .fraud practiced upon it by the forgery”; wherefore, we held the depositor was bound to give immediate notice to the bank of the forgery, and that the courts would not enter upon a speculative inquiry as | 1 | 1915–1915 |
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.