case squarely within rule in Pennsylvania

2008In Sebelin v. Yamaha Motor Corp., 705 A.2d 904 (Pa.Super.1998), an all-terrain vehicle (ATV) that a minor was riding when he was injured while traversing on one of the defendants’ property was impounded by police and later was found to have been stolen from the impound lot.

1960The action of the Commission in creating salaries for its own members (salaries not otlienvise authorized), clearly ultra vires, brings this case squarely within the rule of this Court with respect thereto announced in the early case of Commonwealth v. Mayor of Lancaster, 5 Watts 152 (1836), and Lawson v. Allegheny County, 326 Pa. 242 , 191 Atl. 600 (1937).

1960The action of the Commission in creating salaries for its own members (salaries not otlienvise authorized), clearly ultra vires, brings this case squarely within the rule of this Court with respect thereto announced in the early case of Commonwealth v. Mayor of Lancaster, 5 Watts 152 (1836), and Lawson v. Allegheny County, 326 Pa. 242 , 191 Atl. 600 (1937).

1960The action of the Commission in creating salaries for its own members (salaries not otlienvise authorized), clearly ultra vires, brings this case squarely within the rule of this Court with respect thereto announced in the early case of Commonwealth v. Mayor of Lancaster, 5 Watts 152 (1836), and Lawson v. Allegheny County, 326 Pa. 242 , 191 Atl. 600 (1937).

1943Co., 300 Pa. 55 , 150 A. 153 , that “where there would have been no injury whatever but for the continuing negligence of the defendant who first put the plaintiff in peril, and which existed when the negligence of the other turned the peril into actual injury, the negligences are concurrent and both defendants are jointly and severally liable for the injuries thereby occasioned”.

1943Co., 300 Pa. 55 , 150 A. 153 , that “where there would have been no injury whatever but for the continuing negligence of the defendant who first put the plaintiff in peril, and which existed when the negligence of the other turned the peril into actual injury, the negligences are concurrent and both defendants are jointly and severally liable for the injuries thereby occasioned”.

1935The facts thus accurately stated, brings this case squarely within the principle quoted from McClellan v. Madonti, supra, and justifies the refusal tó enter judgment for the garnishee notwithstanding the verdict.

1921If that which remained to be done was in the course of the ordinary administration of the estate, it would be within the statutory powers of the administrators d. b. n. c. t. a., but it is not of this character; it is a trust for indefinite and uncertain purposes, which are only limited by the fact that they must be charitable; and this brings the case squarely within the rule laid down in Gehr v. McDowell, 206 Pa. 101 , and Strite v. Wolf, 268 Pa. 221 .

1920We are not unmindful of the fact that the court below has found, as a conclusion of law, that “The checks for $28,456.79 and $414.89, were endorsed and delivered to Martha Jane Ingham [defendant] as voluntary gifts, so intended by Martha McConville [plaintiff] and so received by Martha Jane Ingham”; but, as shown above, this legal result is reached by an inference founded on an erroneous conclusion regarding vital facts, and by misapplying legal principles; and this brings the case squarely within the rule stated in Worrall’s App., 110 Pa. 349, 362 , later quoted in Bergner v. Bergner, 219 Pa.

1920We are not unmindful of the fact that the court below has found, as a conclusion of law, that “The checks for $28,456.79 and $414.89, were endorsed and delivered to Martha Jane Ingham [defendant] as voluntary gifts, so intended by Martha McConville [plaintiff] and so received by Martha Jane Ingham”; but, as shown above, this legal result is reached by an inference founded on an erroneous conclusion regarding vital facts, and by misapplying legal principles; and this brings the case squarely within the rule stated in Worrall’s App., 110 Pa. 349, 362 , later quoted in Bergner v. Bergner, 219 Pa.

1909Co., 221 Pa. 129 .

1892These facts bring the case squarely within the doctrine of Chartiers Twp. v. Phillips, 122 Pa. 601 .