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.
7 Pennsylvania opinions name it 3 courts 1992–2018 0 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 |
|---|---|---|
Allstate Insurance v. McFaddengreen2 sentences2014(WCJ Decision at 4-5.) The WCJ rejected Claimant’s assertion that Delaware law, not the Act, governed Employer’s request for subrogation because Pennsylvania had more significant contacts with this WC matter than did Delaware, relying on Allstate Insurance Co. v. McFadden, 407 Pa.Super. 537 , 595 A.2d 1277, 1279 (1991) (applying a significant contacts test to determine whether Pennsylvania or New Jersey law would apply to a WC subrogation matter), and Byard F. Brogan, Inc. v. Workmen’s Compensation Appeal Board (Morrissey), 161 Pa.Cmwlth. 453 , 637 A.2d 689, 692 (1994) (adopting the Allstate r 2014(WCJ Decision at 4-5.) The WCJ rejected Claimant’s assertion that Delaware law, not the Act, governed Employer’s request for subrogation because Pennsylvania had more significant contacts with this WC matter than did Delaware, relying on Allstate Insurance Co. v. McFadden, 407 Pa.Super. 537 , 595 A.2d 1277, 1279 (1991) (applying a significant contacts test to determine whether Pennsylvania or New Jersey law would apply to a WC subrogation matter), and Byard F. Brogan, Inc. v. Workmen’s Compensation Appeal Board (Morrissey), 161 Pa.Cmwlth. 453 , 637 A.2d 689, 692 (1994) (adopting the Allstate r | 1 | 1 |
Byard F. Brogan, Inc. v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal Boardgreen2 sentences2014(WCJ Decision at 4-5.) The WCJ rejected Claimant’s assertion that Delaware law, not the Act, governed Employer’s request for subrogation because Pennsylvania had more significant contacts with this WC matter than did Delaware, relying on Allstate Insurance Co. v. McFadden, 407 Pa.Super. 537 , 595 A.2d 1277, 1279 (1991) (applying a significant contacts test to determine whether Pennsylvania or New Jersey law would apply to a WC subrogation matter), and Byard F. Brogan, Inc. v. Workmen’s Compensation Appeal Board (Morrissey), 161 Pa.Cmwlth. 453 , 637 A.2d 689, 692 (1994) (adopting the Allstate r 2014(WCJ Decision at 4-5.) The WCJ rejected Claimant’s assertion that Delaware law, not the Act, governed Employer’s request for subrogation because Pennsylvania had more significant contacts with this WC matter than did Delaware, relying on Allstate Insurance Co. v. McFadden, 407 Pa.Super. 537 , 595 A.2d 1277, 1279 (1991) (applying a significant contacts test to determine whether Pennsylvania or New Jersey law would apply to a WC subrogation matter), and Byard F. Brogan, Inc. v. Workmen’s Compensation Appeal Board (Morrissey), 161 Pa.Cmwlth. 453 , 637 A.2d 689, 692 (1994) (adopting the Allstate r | 1 | 1 |
Scheafnocker v. Scheafnockergreen2 sentences2005See Scheafnocker v. Scheafnocker, 356 Pa. Super. 118 , 514 A.2d 172 (1986), where court found Pennsylvania had jurisdiction under the substantial contacts doctrine, despite the fact that the children (living in Texas) had not been residents for at least six consecutive months prior thereto so as to consider Pennsylvania the “home state.” The best interest of the children is most definitely involved here as it is the primary standard for child custody in this Commonwealth. 2005See Scheafnocker v. Scheafnocker, 356 Pa. Super. 118 , 514 A.2d 172 (1986), where court found Pennsylvania had jurisdiction under the substantial contacts doctrine, despite the fact that the children (living in Texas) had not been residents for at least six consecutive months prior thereto so as to consider Pennsylvania the “home state.” The best interest of the children is most definitely involved here as it is the primary standard for child custody in this Commonwealth. | 1 | 1 |
McSwain v. McSwaingreen2 sentences1992Under the most significant contacts rule, the paramount consideration is: "... an analysis of the extent to which one state rather than another has demonstrated, by reason of its policies and their connection and relevance to the matter in dispute, a priority of interest in the application of its rule of law." McSwain v. McSwain, 420 Pa. 86, 94 , 215 A.2d 677, 682 (1966). 1992Under the most significant contacts rule, the paramount consideration is: "... an analysis of the extent to which one state rather than another has demonstrated, by reason of its policies and their connection and relevance to the matter in dispute, a priority of interest in the application of its rule of law." McSwain v. McSwain, 420 Pa. 86, 94 , 215 A.2d 677, 682 (1966). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Pennsylvania. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Laconis v. Burlington County Bridge Commission
green
2 sentences2003(Trial court’s decision at 59-60.) Assuming, arguendo, that a true conflict exists as GM contends, the Superi- or Court in Laconis v. Burlington County Bridge Commission, 400 Pa.Super. 483 , 583 A.2d 1218 (1990), petition for allowance of appeal denied, 529 Pa. 615 , 600 A.2d 532 (1991), cert. dismissed, 503 U.S. 901 , 112 S.Ct. 1254 , 117 L.Ed.2d 485 (1992), conducted a choice of law analysis between the application of Pennsylvania or New Jersey law in a personal injury action that also occurred in Pennsylvania and came to the same conclusion as the trial court did in this case — that the sta 2003Furthermore, “in an action for personal injuries, the law of the state where the injury occurred normally determines the rights and liabilities of the parties, unless another state, applying the contacts test, has a more significant relationship to the occurrence and the parties.” (Emphasis added.) Laconis, 583 A.2d at 1222-1223 . | 2 | 1992–2003 |
Merman v. Merman
green
1 sentence2018Therefore, pursuant to Section 5402, Florida is her "home state." Moreover, none of the remaining bases for jurisdiction in Pennsylvania set forth in Section 5421 are applicable since Florida has not declined to exercise jurisdiction.5 Furthermore, Cohen's reliance on Merman, supra, and the significant contacts test, is misplaced. | 1 | 2018–2018 |
Burlington County Bridge Commission v. Laconis
green
2 sentences2003(Trial court’s decision at 59-60.) Assuming, arguendo, that a true conflict exists as GM contends, the Superi- or Court in Laconis v. Burlington County Bridge Commission, 400 Pa.Super. 483 , 583 A.2d 1218 (1990), petition for allowance of appeal denied, 529 Pa. 615 , 600 A.2d 532 (1991), cert. dismissed, 503 U.S. 901 , 112 S.Ct. 1254 , 117 L.Ed.2d 485 (1992), conducted a choice of law analysis between the application of Pennsylvania or New Jersey law in a personal injury action that also occurred in Pennsylvania and came to the same conclusion as the trial court did in this case — that the sta 2003(Trial court’s decision at 59-60.) Assuming, arguendo, that a true conflict exists as GM contends, the Superi- or Court in Laconis v. Burlington County Bridge Commission, 400 Pa.Super. 483 , 583 A.2d 1218 (1990), petition for allowance of appeal denied, 529 Pa. 615 , 600 A.2d 532 (1991), cert. dismissed, 503 U.S. 901 , 112 S.Ct. 1254 , 117 L.Ed.2d 485 (1992), conducted a choice of law analysis between the application of Pennsylvania or New Jersey law in a personal injury action that also occurred in Pennsylvania and came to the same conclusion as the trial court did in this case — that the sta | 1 | 2003–2003 |
Nationwide Mutual Insurance v. Walter
green
2 sentences2002Caputo v. Allstate Insurance Co., 344 Pa.Super. 1 , 495 A.2d 959 (1985). ¶ 16 Pursuant to Nationwide Mutual Insurance Co. v. Walter, 290 Pa.Super. 129 , 434 A.2d 164 (1981), the contacts analysis is different depending on whether the underlying issue is tort or contract. 2002Caputo v. Allstate Insurance Co., 344 Pa.Super. 1 , 495 A.2d 959 (1985). ¶ 16 Pursuant to Nationwide Mutual Insurance Co. v. Walter, 290 Pa.Super. 129 , 434 A.2d 164 (1981), the contacts analysis is different depending on whether the underlying issue is tort or contract. | 1 | 2002–2002 |
Caputo v. Allstate Insurance
green
2 sentences2002Caputo v. Allstate Insurance Co., 344 Pa.Super. 1 , 495 A.2d 959 (1985). ¶ 16 Pursuant to Nationwide Mutual Insurance Co. v. Walter, 290 Pa.Super. 129 , 434 A.2d 164 (1981), the contacts analysis is different depending on whether the underlying issue is tort or contract. 2002Caputo v. Allstate Insurance Co., 344 Pa.Super. 1 , 495 A.2d 959 (1985). ¶ 16 Pursuant to Nationwide Mutual Insurance Co. v. Walter, 290 Pa.Super. 129 , 434 A.2d 164 (1981), the contacts analysis is different depending on whether the underlying issue is tort or contract. | 1 | 2002–2002 |
Miller v. Gay
green
1 sentence1992Id. 400 Pa.Super. at 491-92 , 583 A.2d at 1222-23 . | 1 | 1992–1992 |
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.