8 Pennsylvania opinions name it 2 courts 1934–2021 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 |
|---|---|---|
Tyson & Brother v. Bantongreen1 sentence2021As set forth by Justice Breyer, “sometimes it is necessary to protect the superfluous in order to preserve the necessary.” Id. (citing Tyson & Brother v. Banton, 273 U.S. 418, 447 (1927) (Holmes, J., dissenting)). | 1 | 1 |
Kanawell v. Millergreen1 sentence2017“While ‘the crowning fact’ in the execution of a deed is delivery, yet it is not necessary to prove ‘actual manual investiture,’ since ‘delivery may be inferred or presumed from circumstances.’” Kanawell v. Miller, 104 A. 861, 862 (Pa. 1918) (citation omitted). “[N]o particular form or ceremony is necessary to effect delivery; it is sufficient if the grantor evidences his intention in any manner to put the document into the ownership of the other party and thereby to relinquish all control of it thereafter.” City Stores Co., 103 A.2d at 666 .8 8 The delivery requirement finds its origin in the | 1 | 1 |
Parkhurst Estategreen1 sentence2014In re Parkhurst’s Estate, 167 A.2d 476, 479 (Pa. 1961). | 1 | 1 |
Wagner v. Wagnergreen2 sentences1991See Wagner v. Wagner, 466 Pa. 532 , 540 n. 9, 353 A.2d 819 , 823 n. 9 (1976) (“the name in which securities are registered is not necessarily determinative of ownership as between a transferor ... and a transferee”); see also Green v. McKee, 361 Pa. 95, 98 , 63 A.2d 3, 4 (1949) (transfer of legal ownership may be accomplished absent registration on the corporate books). 1991See Wagner v. Wagner, 466 Pa. 532 , 540 n. 9, 353 A.2d 819 , 823 n. 9 (1976) (“the name in which securities are registered is not necessarily determinative of ownership as between a transferor ... and a transferee”); see also Green v. McKee, 361 Pa. 95, 98 , 63 A.2d 3, 4 (1949) (transfer of legal ownership may be accomplished absent registration on the corporate books). | 1 | 1 |
Green v. McKeegreen2 sentences1991See Wagner v. Wagner, 466 Pa. 532 , 540 n. 9, 353 A.2d 819 , 823 n. 9 (1976) (“the name in which securities are registered is not necessarily determinative of ownership as between a transferor ... and a transferee”); see also Green v. McKee, 361 Pa. 95, 98 , 63 A.2d 3, 4 (1949) (transfer of legal ownership may be accomplished absent registration on the corporate books). 1991See Wagner v. Wagner, 466 Pa. 532 , 540 n. 9, 353 A.2d 819 , 823 n. 9 (1976) (“the name in which securities are registered is not necessarily determinative of ownership as between a transferor ... and a transferee”); see also Green v. McKee, 361 Pa. 95, 98 , 63 A.2d 3, 4 (1949) (transfer of legal ownership may be accomplished absent registration on the corporate books). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Pennsylvania. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
J.S. v. Bethlehem Area School District
green
2 sentences2018Relying upon Tinker, we held that the website “created disorder and significantly and adversely impacted the delivery of instruction.” J.S., 807 A.2d at 869 . 2018Relying upon Tinker , we held that the website "created disorder and significantly and adversely impacted the delivery of instruction." J.S. , 807 A.2d at 869 . | 3 | 2018–2021 |
Horn v. Lehigh Valley Railroad
green
2 sentences1956In Horn v. Lehigh Talley Railroad Co., 274 Pa. 42, 45 , 117 A. 409, 410 , it was said: “A delivery of a claim petition to the United States mails, on the last day to be filed or the day before, duly stamped, properly addressed, sent by registered mail, followed by a receipt by the compensation board within the time usually required to carry a letter to its destination, — these combined circumstances constitute a delivery of the petition when it was deposited in the mails.” See, also, Laffey v. Philadelphia & Reading Coal & Iron Company, 125 Pa. Superior Ct. 9 , 189 A. 509 . 1956In Horn v. Lehigh Talley Railroad Co., 274 Pa. 42, 45 , 117 A. 409, 410 , it was said: “A delivery of a claim petition to the United States mails, on the last day to be filed or the day before, duly stamped, properly addressed, sent by registered mail, followed by a receipt by the compensation board within the time usually required to carry a letter to its destination, — these combined circumstances constitute a delivery of the petition when it was deposited in the mails.” See, also, Laffey v. Philadelphia & Reading Coal & Iron Company, 125 Pa. Superior Ct. 9 , 189 A. 509 . | 2 | 1934–1956 |
City Stores Co. v. Philadelphia
green
1 sentence2017“While ‘the crowning fact’ in the execution of a deed is delivery, yet it is not necessary to prove ‘actual manual investiture,’ since ‘delivery may be inferred or presumed from circumstances.’” Kanawell v. Miller, 104 A. 861, 862 (Pa. 1918) (citation omitted). “[N]o particular form or ceremony is necessary to effect delivery; it is sufficient if the grantor evidences his intention in any manner to put the document into the ownership of the other party and thereby to relinquish all control of it thereafter.” City Stores Co., 103 A.2d at 666 .8 8 The delivery requirement finds its origin in the | 1 | 2017–2017 |
Laffey v. Philadelphia & Reading Coal & Iron Co.
neutral
2 sentences1956In Horn v. Lehigh Talley Railroad Co., 274 Pa. 42, 45 , 117 A. 409, 410 , it was said: “A delivery of a claim petition to the United States mails, on the last day to be filed or the day before, duly stamped, properly addressed, sent by registered mail, followed by a receipt by the compensation board within the time usually required to carry a letter to its destination, — these combined circumstances constitute a delivery of the petition when it was deposited in the mails.” See, also, Laffey v. Philadelphia & Reading Coal & Iron Company, 125 Pa. Superior Ct. 9 , 189 A. 509 . 1956In Horn v. Lehigh Talley Railroad Co., 274 Pa. 42, 45 , 117 A. 409, 410 , it was said: “A delivery of a claim petition to the United States mails, on the last day to be filed or the day before, duly stamped, properly addressed, sent by registered mail, followed by a receipt by the compensation board within the time usually required to carry a letter to its destination, — these combined circumstances constitute a delivery of the petition when it was deposited in the mails.” See, also, Laffey v. Philadelphia & Reading Coal & Iron Company, 125 Pa. Superior Ct. 9 , 189 A. 509 . | 1 | 1956–1956 |
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.