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.
9 Pennsylvania opinions name it 4 courts 1953–2022 1 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 |
|---|---|---|
Kleban v. Commonwealthgreen2 sentences2003Although our supreme court never addressed whether the "family obligation" exclusion was unconstitutional, the legislature repealed section 402(b)(2) in 1980 based on this court's decision in Wallace . [8] Since 1980, there have been no additional legislative changes to section 402(b) with respect to "family obligations." Section 402(b) is now "identical to the 1955 version *247 that the Supreme Court considered in Savage." Kleban v. Unemployment Compensation Board of Review, 73 Pa.Cmwlth. 540 , 459 A.2d 53, 55 (1983). 2003Although our supreme court never addressed whether the "family obligation" exclusion was unconstitutional, the legislature repealed section 402(b)(2) in 1980 based on this court's decision in Wallace . [8] Since 1980, there have been no additional legislative changes to section 402(b) with respect to "family obligations." Section 402(b) is now "identical to the 1955 version *247 that the Supreme Court considered in Savage." Kleban v. Unemployment Compensation Board of Review, 73 Pa.Cmwlth. 540 , 459 A.2d 53, 55 (1983). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Pennsylvania. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Jf v. Db
green
2 sentences2018J.F., 897 A.2d at 1280 . 2018J.F. , 897 A.2d at 1280 . | 2 | 2018–2018 |
Dana Holding Corp. v. Workers' Comp. Appeal Bd.
green
1 sentence2022Most notably, in Dana Holding Corporation v. Workers’ Compensation Appeal Board (Smuck), 195 A.3d 635 , 642 n.9 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2018), affirmed, 253 A.3d 629 (Pa. 2020), we held that Protz II could be retroactively applied in instances “where the underlying IRE was still being actively litigated when Protz II was issued.” 5 2020) (holding that the reinstatement of benefits as of the date when the claimant petitioned for reinstatement was consistent with Act 111); White v. Workers’ Comp. | 1 | 2022–2022 |
Blackwell v. Com. State Ethics Com'n
green
1 sentence2022Noting that “it would indeed be chaotic to act as though the offending provision . . . had never been enacted into law,” the Court declined to rule unconstitutional those “countless unchallenged transactions . . . which are now final.” Id. at 1102 . 9 Our courts have found retroactive application of Protz II to be appropriate in narrow circumstances. | 1 | 2022–2022 |
Com. v. Swan
green
1 sentence2015Appellant, through counsel, filed a timely notice of appeal on January 17, 2007. -2- J-S17020-15 Commonwealth v. Stephens, 168 WDA 2007, 959 A.2d 974 (Pa. Super. filed June 30, 2008) (unpublished memorandum at 1-3) (internal citations and footnote omitted). | 1 | 2015–2015 |
Seattle Times Co. v. Rhinehart
green
2 sentences2014Nevertheless, in a footnote supplementing its declination, the court suggested that “a litigant has no right to disseminate private documents gained through the discovery process.” Id. at 345 n. 15 (citing Seattle Times, 467 U.S. at 32-34 , 104 S.Ct. 2199 ). 2014Nevertheless, in a footnote supplementing its declination, the court suggested that “a litigant has no right to disseminate private documents gained through the discovery process.” Id. at 345 n. 15 (citing Seattle Times, 467 U.S. at 32-34 , 104 S.Ct. 2199 ). | 1 | 2014–2014 |
MarkWest Liberty Midstream & Resources, LLC v. Clean Air Council
green
2 sentences2014The court declined to rule on a second issue related to the “use, disclosure, and retention of ... documents produced during discovery.” Id. at 345 . 2014Nevertheless, in a footnote supplementing its declination, the court suggested that “a litigant has no right to disseminate private documents gained through the discovery process.” Id. at 345 n. 15 (citing Seattle Times, 467 U.S. at 32-34 , 104 S.Ct. 2199 ). | 1 | 2014–2014 |
Commonwealth v. Allen
green
1 sentence2014Allen, 59 A.3d at 679 n. 3. -4- J-S50021-14 While noting that the practical implications of the Allen decision “make destruction of seized property, including contraband, at any time a near impossibility,” the trial court declined to rule on Appellant’s motion because the Allen decision is currently under review by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court. | 1 | 2014–2014 |
Richards v. COM., UNEMPLOY. COMP. BD.
green
2 sentences2003However, the court declined to rule on the issue because it was possible to resolve the matter before it on non-constitutional grounds. [7] Id. 2003However, the court declined to rule on the issue because it was possible to resolve the matter before it on non-constitutional grounds. 7 Id. | 1 | 2003–2003 |
DeLuca v. READER
green
2 sentences1985Appellees Arrow and Hartz do not pursue the claim of privilege on appeal; the remaining appellees advert to the theory of privilege enunciated in DeLuca v. Reader, 227 Pa.Super. 392 , 323 A.2d 309 (1974) (allocatur denied), a theory not specifically presented to the trial court. 1985Appellees Arrow and Hartz do not pursue the claim of privilege on appeal; the remaining appellees advert to the theory of privilege enunciated in DeLuca v. Reader, 227 Pa.Super. 392 , 323 A.2d 309 (1974) (allocatur denied), a theory not specifically presented to the trial court. | 1 | 1985–1985 |
Fife v. the Great A. & P. Tea Co.
neutral
1 sentence1953In Fife v. The Great A. & P. Tea Company, 169 Pa. Superior Ct. 110 , one question was whether a witness who testified but was not subpoenaed was entitled to have his fees taxed against the losing party. | 1 | 1953–1953 |
Walker v. Pennsylvania Railroad
green
1 sentence1953He cites the Act of July 21, 1941, P. L. 425, 28 PS §416.1, which defines a witness as follows: “The word ‘witness’ as used in this Act means a witness subpoenaed to testify before (a) any court of record, or (b) any department, board, commission or legislative body of the state government or any municipality, or (c) any officer or committee of, or appointed by, any such court, department, board, commission or legislative body.” In Walter v. Pennsylvania Railroad Company, 151 Pa. Superior Ct. 80 , the court declined to rule the question whether one who appears without subpoena but testifies is | 1 | 1953–1953 |
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.