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 2014–2025 2 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 |
|---|---|---|
Young v. Commonwealth Department of Transportationgreen2 sentences2014See Young v. Commonwealth, Dep’t of Transp., 560 Pa. 373, 376 , 744 A.2d 1276, 1277 (2000). 2014See Young v. Commonwealth, Dep’t of Transp., 560 Pa. 373, 376 , 744 A.2d 1276, 1277 (2000). | 2 | 2 |
Trump v. Mazars USA, LLPgreen1 sentence2023“First, courts should carefully assess whether the asserted legislative purpose warrants the significant step” of issuing the subpoena, because “occasion[s] for constitutional confrontation between the two branches should be avoided whenever possible.” Mazars, 140 S. Ct. at 2035 (citation, internal quotations omitted). | 1 | 1 |
Commonwealth v. Williamsgreen1 sentence2014The purposes of the registration and notification requirements are "to promote public safety through a civil, regulatory scheme." Commonwealth v. Williams, 832 A.2d 962, 972 (Pa. 2003) (Williams II). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Pennsylvania. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Commonwealth v. Schnabel
green
1 sentence2025In Commonwealth v. Schnabel, 344 A.2d 896 , 898 n.3 (Pa. Super. 1975), we found waiver from Schnabel’s failure to raise a de minimis dismissal claim before the trial court, and explicitly refrained from considering the applicability of Section 312 in the first instance. | 1 | 2025–2025 |
McGrain v. Daugherty
green
1 sentence2023In Mazars, the Court examined Congressional subpoenas seeking the President’s information under the lens of separation of powers, announcing a non-exhaustive series of safeguards—in contrast to the generally applicable presumption stated in McGrain [v. Daugherty, 273 U.S. 135 (1927)]—when the legislative subpoena authority is directed at another branch of government. | 1 | 2023–2023 |
Preston v. Ferrer
green
1 sentence2016Id. | 1 | 2016–2016 |
Discover Bank v. Superior Court
red
2 sentences2016Id. 2016The inquiry is more complex, however, when a generally applicable doctrine, such as unconscionability, is alleged to (Qcontinued) person or property of another.” (Civ.Code, § 1668.) Under these circumstances, such waivers are unconscionable under California law and should not be enforced. 113 P.3d at 1110 . [J-43-2016] - 22 have been applied in a manner hostile to arbitration. | 1 | 2016–2016 |
State v. Elison
green
1 sentence2014Rather, the court held, a warrantless search of an automobile requires not only probable cause, but also “a generally applicable exception to the warrant requirement such as a plain view search, a search incident to arrest, or exigent circumstances.” Id. | 1 | 2014–2014 |
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.