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.
6 Pennsylvania opinions name it 3 courts 1926–2023 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 |
|---|---|---|
Commonwealth v. Russogreen1 sentence2023Russo, 934 A.2d at 1217 (Cappy, J., dissenting). | 1 | 1 |
Lawless v. Jubelirergreen1 sentence2019See also Lawless v. Jubelirer , 789 A.2d 820 , 826-27 (Pa. Cmwlth.), aff'd , 571 Pa. 79 , 811 A.2d 974 (2002), wherein this Court observed: There is, however, a narrow exception to the general requirements of standing where a citizen may challenge an action that would otherwise go unchallenged in the courts. | 1 | 1 |
Lawless v. Jubelirergreen2 sentences2019See also Lawless v. Jubelirer , 789 A.2d 820 , 826-27 (Pa. Cmwlth.), aff'd , 571 Pa. 79 , 811 A.2d 974 (2002), wherein this Court observed: There is, however, a narrow exception to the general requirements of standing where a citizen may challenge an action that would otherwise go unchallenged in the courts. 2019See also Lawless v. Jubelirer , 789 A.2d 820 , 826-27 (Pa. Cmwlth.), aff'd , 571 Pa. 79 , 811 A.2d 974 (2002), wherein this Court observed: There is, however, a narrow exception to the general requirements of standing where a citizen may challenge an action that would otherwise go unchallenged in the courts. | 1 | 1 |
Steiner v. Markelgreen1 sentence2019See Pa.R.A.P. 302 ([i]ssues not raised in the lower court are waived and cannot be raised for the first time on appeal); see also Steiner v. Markel, 968 A.2d 1253, 1257 (Pa. 2009) (issues not raised before the trial court cannot be preserved or resurrected by including in a Rule 1925(b) statement); see also Estate of O’Connell, 79 A.3d 1134, 1140 (Pa. Super. 2013). | 1 | 1 |
Estate of O'Connell ex rel. O'Connell v. Progressive Insurance Co.green1 sentence2019See Pa.R.A.P. 302 ([i]ssues not raised in the lower court are waived and cannot be raised for the first time on appeal); see also Steiner v. Markel, 968 A.2d 1253, 1257 (Pa. 2009) (issues not raised before the trial court cannot be preserved or resurrected by including in a Rule 1925(b) statement); see also Estate of O’Connell, 79 A.3d 1134, 1140 (Pa. Super. 2013). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Pennsylvania. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Owens v. Shannon
green
1 sentence2021Owens v. Shannon, 808 A.2d 607 , 609 n.6 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2002). | 1 | 2021–2021 |
Lobolito, Inc. v. North Pocono School District
green
2 sentences2002Lobolito, Inc. v. North Pocono School District, 562 Pa. 380 , 755 A.2d 1287 (2000). 6 .While nowhere in his complaint did Owens specifically allege that he was bringing his action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 , which allows a citizen to challenge conduct by a state official whom he claims has deprived him of his civil rights, Robles v. Pennsylvania Department of Corrections, 718 A.2d 882 (Pa.Cmwlth. 1998), Owens’ complaint sounds in a Section 1983 action. 2002Lobolito, Inc. v. North Pocono School District, 562 Pa. 380 , 755 A.2d 1287 (2000). 6 .While nowhere in his complaint did Owens specifically allege that he was bringing his action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 , which allows a citizen to challenge conduct by a state official whom he claims has deprived him of his civil rights, Robles v. Pennsylvania Department of Corrections, 718 A.2d 882 (Pa.Cmwlth. 1998), Owens’ complaint sounds in a Section 1983 action. | 1 | 2002–2002 |
Robles v. Pennsylvania Department of Corrections
green
1 sentence2002Lobolito, Inc. v. North Pocono School District, 562 Pa. 380 , 755 A.2d 1287 (2000). 6 .While nowhere in his complaint did Owens specifically allege that he was bringing his action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 , which allows a citizen to challenge conduct by a state official whom he claims has deprived him of his civil rights, Robles v. Pennsylvania Department of Corrections, 718 A.2d 882 (Pa.Cmwlth. 1998), Owens’ complaint sounds in a Section 1983 action. | 1 | 2002–2002 |
In re Rule on Kennedy
neutral
1 sentence1926P. Kennedy, 120 Pa. 497 ; Murphy’s Est., 258 Pa. 38, 44 . | 1 | 1926–1926 |
Murphy's Estate
green
1 sentence1926P. Kennedy, 120 Pa. 497 ; Murphy’s Est., 258 Pa. 38, 44 . | 1 | 1926–1926 |
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.