7 Pennsylvania opinions name it 4 courts 1949–2017 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 |
|---|---|---|
Mobil Oil Corp. v. Zoning Board of Adjustmentgreen2 sentences1985Far from establishing that the Naples’ property was “almost valueless” as zoned, the testimony adduced at the hearing established only that despite “active, prolonged and specific testing of the marketability” of the property, Mobil Oil Corp. v. Zoning Board of Adjustment, 5 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 535, 540 , 291 A.2d 541, 544 (1972), it conld not be sold as zoned for $335,000-$350,000. 1985Far from establishing that the Naples’ property was “almost valueless” as zoned, the testimony adduced at the hearing established only that despite “active, prolonged and specific testing of the marketability” of the property, Mobil Oil Corp. v. Zoning Board of Adjustment, 5 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 535, 540 , 291 A.2d 541, 544 (1972), it conld not be sold as zoned for $335,000-$350,000. | 1 | 1 |
Allen v. Uniontown Area School Districtgreen2 sentences1980“The only limitation which should be imposed on the exercise of this power should be that the board must act intelligently, impartially and with sound discretion.” Smith v. Darby School District, 388 Pa. 301, 314 , 130 A.2d 661, 669 (1957). • The standard by which courts must assay the propriety of a discretionary action was set forth at length in Allen v. Uniontown Area School District, 4 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 183, 186-8 , 285 A.2d 543, 545-6 (1971): In the case of Lamb v. Redding, 234 Pa. 481, 484-5 , 83 A. 362 (1912) the Court stated: ‘The burden of showing to the contrary, when the action o 1980“The only limitation which should be imposed on the exercise of this power should be that the board must act intelligently, impartially and with sound discretion.” Smith v. Darby School District, 388 Pa. 301, 314 , 130 A.2d 661, 669 (1957). • The standard by which courts must assay the propriety of a discretionary action was set forth at length in Allen v. Uniontown Area School District, 4 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 183, 186-8 , 285 A.2d 543, 545-6 (1971): In the case of Lamb v. Redding, 234 Pa. 481, 484-5 , 83 A. 362 (1912) the Court stated: ‘The burden of showing to the contrary, when the action o | 1 | 1 |
Smith v. Darby School Districtgreen2 sentences1980“The only limitation which should be imposed on the exercise of this power should be that the board must act intelligently, impartially and with sound discretion.” Smith v. Darby School District, 388 Pa. 301, 314 , 130 A.2d 661, 669 (1957). • The standard by which courts must assay the propriety of a discretionary action was set forth at length in Allen v. Uniontown Area School District, 4 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 183, 186-8 , 285 A.2d 543, 545-6 (1971): In the case of Lamb v. Redding, 234 Pa. 481, 484-5 , 83 A. 362 (1912) the Court stated: ‘The burden of showing to the contrary, when the action o 1980“The only limitation which should be imposed on the exercise of this power should be that the board must act intelligently, impartially and with sound discretion.” Smith v. Darby School District, 388 Pa. 301, 314 , 130 A.2d 661, 669 (1957). • The standard by which courts must assay the propriety of a discretionary action was set forth at length in Allen v. Uniontown Area School District, 4 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 183, 186-8 , 285 A.2d 543, 545-6 (1971): In the case of Lamb v. Redding, 234 Pa. 481, 484-5 , 83 A. 362 (1912) the Court stated: ‘The burden of showing to the contrary, when the action o | 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. Herzog
green
2 sentences1961This court’s duty is, therefore, “to determine independently, on the basis of the testimony adduced at the hearing on appeal, whether the suspension was merited:” Commonwealth v. Herzog, 359 Pa. 641, 643 . 1950On an appeal such as this, it is the duty of the court to determine independently, on the basis of the testimony adduced at the hearing on the appeal, whether the suspension was merited: Commonwealth v. Herzog, 359 Pa. 641 . | 2 | 1950–1961 |
Fritz v. Commonwealth, Unemployment Compensation Board of Review
green
1 sentence2017Fritz, 446 A.2d at 332 . | 1 | 2017–2017 |
Lamb v. Redding
green
2 sentences1980“The only limitation which should be imposed on the exercise of this power should be that the board must act intelligently, impartially and with sound discretion.” Smith v. Darby School District, 388 Pa. 301, 314 , 130 A.2d 661, 669 (1957). • The standard by which courts must assay the propriety of a discretionary action was set forth at length in Allen v. Uniontown Area School District, 4 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 183, 186-8 , 285 A.2d 543, 545-6 (1971): In the case of Lamb v. Redding, 234 Pa. 481, 484-5 , 83 A. 362 (1912) the Court stated: ‘The burden of showing to the contrary, when the action o 1980“The only limitation which should be imposed on the exercise of this power should be that the board must act intelligently, impartially and with sound discretion.” Smith v. Darby School District, 388 Pa. 301, 314 , 130 A.2d 661, 669 (1957). • The standard by which courts must assay the propriety of a discretionary action was set forth at length in Allen v. Uniontown Area School District, 4 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 183, 186-8 , 285 A.2d 543, 545-6 (1971): In the case of Lamb v. Redding, 234 Pa. 481, 484-5 , 83 A. 362 (1912) the Court stated: ‘The burden of showing to the contrary, when the action o | 1 | 1980–1980 |
Nichols v. Nichols
green
2 sentences1980Sacavitch v. Sacavitch, 206 Pa.Super. 229 , 212 A.2d 926 (1965); Nichols v. Nichols, 207 Pa.Super. 220 , 217 A.2d 807 (1966).” After careful review of the evidence, de novo, we find no reason to disagree with the determination of the court below. 1980Sacavitch v. Sacavitch, 206 Pa.Super. 229 , 212 A.2d 926 (1965); Nichols v. Nichols, 207 Pa.Super. 220 , 217 A.2d 807 (1966).” After careful review of the evidence, de novo, we find no reason to disagree with the determination of the court below. | 1 | 1980–1980 |
Sacavitch v. Sacavitch
green
2 sentences1980Sacavitch v. Sacavitch, 206 Pa.Super. 229 , 212 A.2d 926 (1965); Nichols v. Nichols, 207 Pa.Super. 220 , 217 A.2d 807 (1966).” After careful review of the evidence, de novo, we find no reason to disagree with the determination of the court below. 1980Sacavitch v. Sacavitch, 206 Pa.Super. 229 , 212 A.2d 926 (1965); Nichols v. Nichols, 207 Pa.Super. 220 , 217 A.2d 807 (1966).” After careful review of the evidence, de novo, we find no reason to disagree with the determination of the court below. | 1 | 1980–1980 |
Commonwealth v. Wagner
green
1 sentence1950The court has power to determine independently the merit of the suspension: Commonwealth v. Wagner, 364 Pa. 566 . | 1 | 1950–1950 |
Bureau of Highway Safety v. Wright
green
1 sentence1949In the Wright case Justice Jones states ( 355 Pa. 307, 311 ) : “An examination of our cases where reinstatement by a court of common pleas of an operator’s suspended license has been sustained will disclose that the alleged actionable violation of the Code was either doubt ful or at least not clearly proven under the testimony adduced at the hearing in court on appeal.” This defendant himself has placed his violation beyond doubt by admitting that. he violated the code repeatedly. | 1 | 1949–1949 |
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.