statutorily factors (Pennsylvania) · Go Syfert
← Pennsylvania issues

statutorily factors in Pennsylvania

7 Pennsylvania opinions name it 3 courts 1968–2025 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.

Followed or applied (5)

CaseFollowedCited
Johns v. Ciocigreen
pasuperct · 2004 · cited in 1 Pennsylvania opinions naming this issue, 2025–2025
1 sentence

2025The statutorily required factors are as follows: (a) Factors.--In ordering any form of custody, the court shall determine the best interest of the child by considering all relevant factors, giving weighted consideration to those factors which affect the safety of the child, including the following: (1) Which party is more likely to encourage and permit frequent and continuing contact between the child and another party. ____________________________________________ 3 “A party seeking modification of custody arrangements has the burden to show that modification is in the child's best interest.”

11
Commonwealth v. Sarveygreen
pasuperct · 2018 · cited in 1 Pennsylvania opinions naming this issue, 2023–2023
1 sentence

2023Miles provides the proposition that an appellate court “must review the record and consider the nature and circumstances of the offense, the sentencing court’s observations of the defendant, the findings that formed the basis of the sentence, and the sentencing guidelines … with particular concern for whether the defendant received an individualized sentence.” Id., at 18, quoting Commonwealth v. Sarvey, 199 A.3d 436, 456 (Pa. Super. 2018) (citation omitted).

11
Commonwealth v. Battsgreen
pa · 2013 · cited in 1 Pennsylvania opinions naming this issue, 2017–2017
2 sentences

2017In its consideration of the statutorily required factors, 2 the trial court found that the crime was “horrendous” and negatively impacted the community; that Batts constituted a “severe threat to the public” and was “ ‘streetwise,’ with ‘a well-developed criminal mentality and the degree of maturity necessary to commit audacious criminal acts.’ ” Batts I, 66 A.3d at 288 -89 (quoting Trial Court Order, 2/21/2007, at 5-6).

2017In its consideration of the statutorily required factors,2 the trial court found that the crime was “horrendous” and negatively impacted the community; that Batts constituted a “severe threat to the public” and was “‘streetwise,’ with ‘a well-developed criminal mentality and the degree of maturity necessary to commit audacious criminal 2 In determining whether transferring the case to the juvenile court would serve the public interest, the sentencing court was required to consider: (A) the impact of the offense on the victim or victims; (B) the impact of the offense on the community; (C) the t

11
School District v. Commonwealth, Department of Educationgreen
pa · 1980 · cited in 1 Pennsylvania opinions naming this issue, 2002–2002
2 sentences

2002See also School District of Pittsburgh v. Department of Education, 492 Pa. 140 , 422 A.2d 1054 (1980), where reduction of a transportation subsidy was accomplished through a statutorily required hearing.

2002See also School District of Pittsburgh v. Department of Education, 492 Pa. 140 , 422 A.2d 1054 (1980), where reduction of a transportation subsidy was accomplished through a statutorily required hearing.

11
Pennsylvania Labor Relations Board v. Kaufmann Department Stores, Inc.green
pa · 1942 · cited in 1 Pennsylvania opinions naming this issue, 1968–1968
2 sentences

1968Opinion by Mr. Justice Roberts, This litigation presents but a single issue: are the findings of the Pennsylvania Labor Relations Board [hereinafter the Board] supported by the statutorily required standard, i.e., by “substantial and legally credible evidence.” Pennsylvania Labor Relations Act, Act of June 1, 1937, P. L. 1168, §9, as amended, 43 P.S. §211.9(b); see generally, Pennsylvania Labor Relations Board v. Kaufmann Department Stores, Inc., 345 Pa. 398 , 29 A. 2d 90 (1942).

1968Opinion by Mr. Justice Roberts, This litigation presents but a single issue: are the findings of the Pennsylvania Labor Relations Board [hereinafter the Board] supported by the statutorily required standard, i.e., by “substantial and legally credible evidence.” Pennsylvania Labor Relations Act, Act of June 1, 1937, P. L. 1168, §9, as amended, 43 P.S. §211.9(b); see generally, Pennsylvania Labor Relations Board v. Kaufmann Department Stores, Inc., 345 Pa. 398 , 29 A. 2d 90 (1942).

11

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Pennsylvania. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (1)

CaseCitedYears
Commonwealth v. Gorbea-Lespier green
pasuperct · 2013
2 sentences

2020Id. at 21-22 (unpaginated) (citing Gorbea-Lespier, 66 A.3d at 384 ). -7- J-S23014-20 Lastly, Appellant essentially argues that Officer Pasley, who escorted Appellant to the hospital for the blood draw, also failed to provide Appellant with the necessary implied consent warnings at the time of the blood draw, which is tantamount to a separate statutory violation supporting the suppression of the blood draw as nonconsensual.

2020Id. at 21-22 (unpaginated) (citing Gorbea-Lespier, 66 A.3d at 384 ).

22020–2020

Where else courts name it

TX 23 (1999–2019) CT 19 (1985–2016) CA 14 (2000–2024) IL 9 (1983–2024) OH 7 (2002–2020) PA 7 (1968–2025) NY 6 (1986–2011) MT 6 (1986–2018) FL 5 (1987–2011) UT 4 (2011–2023) OR 4 (1996–2023) WA 3 (1995–2011) MN 3 (2001–2019) NC 3 (2011–2020) OK 3 (2003–2019) GA 2 (1985–2023) ME 2 (1978–2023) KS 2 (2011–2022) IN 2 (1974–2009) MA 2 (2009–2014) LA 2 (1979–1997)

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.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check