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 4 courts 1974–2026 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 |
|---|---|---|
DEPT. OF GEN. SERV. v. US Mineral Prod.green1 sentence2006See Concurring and Dissenting Opinion, op. at ___, 898 A.2d at 619 (Newman, J.). | 1 | 1 |
Henshaw v. American Cement Corporationgreen1 sentence1998Courts offer the following responses to this argument against an absolute rule: Henshaw v. American Cement Corp., supra, 252 A.2d at 129 (a corporation has its remedy in the courts if the director violates his fiduciary duties by making information available to persons hostile to the corporation or otherwise not entitled to it); Baker v. Henry Glass & Co., supra, 531 N.Y.S.2d at 749 (misuse of confidential information is actionable by the corporation); Dusel v. Castellani, 350 N.Y.S.2d 258, 259 (N.Y. | 1 | 1 |
Dusel v. Castellanigreen1 sentence1998Courts offer the following responses to this argument against an absolute rule: Henshaw v. American Cement Corp., supra, 252 A.2d at 129 (a corporation has its remedy in the courts if the director violates his fiduciary duties by making information available to persons hostile to the corporation or otherwise not entitled to it); Baker v. Henry Glass & Co., supra, 531 N.Y.S.2d at 749 (misuse of confidential information is actionable by the corporation); Dusel v. Castellani, 350 N.Y.S.2d 258, 259 (N.Y. | 1 | 1 |
Baker v. Henry Glass & Co.green1 sentence1998Courts offer the following responses to this argument against an absolute rule: Henshaw v. American Cement Corp., supra, 252 A.2d at 129 (a corporation has its remedy in the courts if the director violates his fiduciary duties by making information available to persons hostile to the corporation or otherwise not entitled to it); Baker v. Henry Glass & Co., supra, 531 N.Y.S.2d at 749 (misuse of confidential information is actionable by the corporation); Dusel v. Castellani, 350 N.Y.S.2d 258, 259 (N.Y. | 1 | 1 |
Commonwealth v. Davisgreen2 sentences1983The difficulty with the rule is that it does not say with what degree of specificity the motion must state the "issues raised and the grounds relied upon." Is an "issue[] raised" when a motion states that "the evidence was insufficient to support the verdict," or that "the verdict was against the weight of the evidence?" Are these assignments of error statements of "grounds relied upon?" In Commonwealth v. Davis, 477 Pa. 197 , 383 A.2d 891 , (1978), the Supreme Court held that a motion for a new trial *261 that "stated that `the verdict is contrary to the weight of the evidence' . . . [stated] 1983The difficulty with the rule is that it does not say with what degree of specificity the motion must state the "issues raised and the grounds relied upon." Is an "issue[] raised" when a motion states that "the evidence was insufficient to support the verdict," or that "the verdict was against the weight of the evidence?" Are these assignments of error statements of "grounds relied upon?" In Commonwealth v. Davis, 477 Pa. 197 , 383 A.2d 891 , (1978), the Supreme Court held that a motion for a new trial *261 that "stated that `the verdict is contrary to the weight of the evidence' . . . [stated] | 1 | 1 |
Commonwealth v. Litmangreen2 sentences1980However, because of the seriousness of appellant's accusations, and the difficulty of the waiver issue, we have examined appellant's argument on its merits. [3] See Commonwealth v. Litman, 276 Pa.Super. 114 , 419 A.2d 121 (1980) (granting defendant new trial because trial court failed to instruct the jury adequately on factors relevant to issue of whether defendant had requisite mental status to be convicted of receiving stolen property). [4] There is no evidence that the Commonwealth engaged in prosecutorial misconduct in not prosecuting Brenner for perjury. 1980However, because of the seriousness of appellant's accusations, and the difficulty of the waiver issue, we have examined appellant's argument on its merits. [3] See Commonwealth v. Litman, 276 Pa.Super. 114 , 419 A.2d 121 (1980) (granting defendant new trial because trial court failed to instruct the jury adequately on factors relevant to issue of whether defendant had requisite mental status to be convicted of receiving stolen property). [4] There is no evidence that the Commonwealth engaged in prosecutorial misconduct in not prosecuting Brenner for perjury. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Pennsylvania. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Bruton v. United States
green
1 sentence2026The OAJC also relies upon the trial court’s final charge to the jury, in which the trial court instructed the jury that it had to consider and weigh the testimony of each witness and give that testimony such weight and importance “as in your judgment [it] is fairly entitled to receive[.]”33 The difficulty with this instruction is that the detectives’ interrogation accusations were not presented through the testimony of witnesses, as that plainly would not be permitted.34 Rather, the same opinions and accusations that would have been inadmissible had they been offered through a witness came int | 1 | 2026–2026 |
Young v. Pennsylvania Board of Probation & Parole
green
1 sentence2026The OAJC also relies upon the trial court’s final charge to the jury, in which the trial court instructed the jury that it had to consider and weigh the testimony of each witness and give that testimony such weight and importance “as in your judgment [it] is fairly entitled to receive[.]”33 The difficulty with this instruction is that the detectives’ interrogation accusations were not presented through the testimony of witnesses, as that plainly would not be permitted.34 Rather, the same opinions and accusations that would have been inadmissible had they been offered through a witness came int | 1 | 2026–2026 |
Commonwealth v. Blair
green
2 sentences1983This decision is consistent with the provision in the Act of June 15, 1951, P.L. 585, § 1, 19 P.S. § 871, that a motion in arrest of judgment may be made "on the ground[] that the evidence was insufficient to sustain the charge. . . ." Thus it would seem that both assignments of error — that the evidence was insufficient, and that the verdict was against the weight of the evidence — state "a proper ground for relief," and, therefore, are within Rule 1123(a). [1] The difficulty with this conclusion is that in a line of decisions starting with Commonwealth v. Blair, 460 Pa. 31 , 331 A.2d 213 (19 1983This decision is consistent with the provision in the Act of June 15, 1951, P.L. 585, § 1, 19 P.S. § 871, that a motion in arrest of judgment may be made "on the ground[] that the evidence was insufficient to sustain the charge. . . ." Thus it would seem that both assignments of error — that the evidence was insufficient, and that the verdict was against the weight of the evidence — state "a proper ground for relief," and, therefore, are within Rule 1123(a). [1] The difficulty with this conclusion is that in a line of decisions starting with Commonwealth v. Blair, 460 Pa. 31 , 331 A.2d 213 (19 | 1 | 1983–1983 |
Commonwealth v. Myers
green
2 sentences1980Cf. Commonwealth v. Myers, 485 Pa. 519 , 403 A.2d 85 (1979) (Commonwealth guilty of misconduct for delaying sentencing of convicted perjurer five years until perjurer testified in other criminal prosecutions). [5] It may also be noted that at appellant's trial, Brenner stated that he may have met with Ackerman and Wilde more than five or six times. 1980Cf. Commonwealth v. Myers, 485 Pa. 519 , 403 A.2d 85 (1979) (Commonwealth guilty of misconduct for delaying sentencing of convicted perjurer five years until perjurer testified in other criminal prosecutions). [5] It may also be noted that at appellant's trial, Brenner stated that he may have met with Ackerman and Wilde more than five or six times. | 1 | 1980–1980 |
Dilliplaine v. Lehigh Valley Trust Co.
green
2 sentences1977Specifically, appellant contends that the rationale set forth in Dilliplaine v. Lehigh Valley Trust Co., 457 Pa. 255 , 322 A.2d 114 (1974), a case involving the denial of a motion for a new trial, should not be applied where a party is seeking a judgment n.o. v. This is so, it is argued, (1) because in the case of an appeal from the denial of a motion for judgment n.o.v. an appellate court can correct a trial court's error without requiring further judicial proceedings; and (2) because by limiting the doctrine to cases capable of being finally decided on appeal, the concern expressed in Dillip 1977Specifically, appellant contends that the rationale set forth in Dilliplaine v. Lehigh Valley Trust Co., 457 Pa. 255 , 322 A.2d 114 (1974), a case involving the denial of a motion for a new trial, should not be applied where a party is seeking a judgment n.o. v. This is so, it is argued, (1) because in the case of an appeal from the denial of a motion for judgment n.o.v. an appellate court can correct a trial court's error without requiring further judicial proceedings; and (2) because by limiting the doctrine to cases capable of being finally decided on appeal, the concern expressed in Dillip | 1 | 1977–1977 |
Lutheran Home at Topton, Pa. Tax Ap.
green
2 sentences1974The difficulty of applying the test of necessity is well exemplified by this Court’s two previous decisions on this subject, The Lutheran Home at Topton, Pennsylvania Tax Appeal, 6 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 199 , 293 A. 2d 888 (1972), and E. 1974The difficulty of applying the test of necessity is well exemplified by this Court’s two previous decisions on this subject, The Lutheran Home at Topton, Pennsylvania Tax Appeal, 6 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 199 , 293 A. 2d 888 (1972), and E. | 1 | 1974–1974 |
In re Determination of Board for Assessment
neutral
2 sentences1974Pa. Conference Tax Exemption Case, 2 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 281 , 278 A. 2d 180 (1971), neither of which is determinative here. 1974Pa. Conference Tax Exemption Case, 2 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 281 , 278 A. 2d 180 (1971), neither of which is determinative here. | 1 | 1974–1974 |
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.