Freeman claim (Pennsylvania) · Go Syfert
← Pennsylvania issues

Freeman claim in Pennsylvania

6 Pennsylvania opinions name it 3 courts 1994–2023 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.

Followed or applied (2)

CaseFollowedCited
Smith v. Board of Probation & Parolegreen
pa · 1990 · cited in 1 Pennsylvania opinions naming this issue, 2016–2016
1 sentence

2016Freeman’s claim to the contrary lacks merit. 10 “[a]s long as the period of recommitment is within the presumptive range for the violation, the Commonwealth Court will not entertain challenges to the propriety of the term of recommitment.” Smith v. Pa. Bd. of Prob. & Parole, 574 A.2d 558, 560 (Pa. 1990).

11
Commonwealth v. Freemangreen
pa · 2003 · cited in 1 Pennsylvania opinions naming this issue, 2004–2004
2 sentences

2004See id. at 403.

2004See id. at 403.

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 (4)

CaseCitedYears
Ramich ex rel. Ramich v. Workers' Compensation Appeal Board green
pa · 2000
2 sentences

2023We read the WCJ’s finding that Claimant’s concurrent employment with Public Partnerships was “going on for a substantial period of time,” (FOF ¶ 12), not as the WCJ’s disregard of Freeman’s standard, but as a finding that this employment relationship was “sufficiently intact” as required by Linch, 746 A.2d at 1112 .

2023Even though Claimant may not have worked her Public Partnerships job on the day she was injured, there can be no reasonable argument that her employment relationship with Public Partnerships was not “sufficiently intact,” id., when the work injury occurred in December 2018, where the credited evidence showed that this relationship existed prior to her work with Employer, while she worked for Employer, and after she stopped working for Employer.

12023–2023
Commonwealth v. Horshaw green
pasuperct · 1975
1 sentence

2019In its Opinion, the trial court addressed and rejected Freeman’s claim as follows: “The Commonwealth … need not show the weapon to have been operable until evidence of its inoperability has been introduced into evidence.” Com[monwealth] v. Horshaw, … 346 A.2d 340 [, 342] ([Pa. Super.] 1975) (citation omitted).

12019–2019
Greenberg, M. v. McGraw, N. green
pasuperct · 2017
1 sentence

2018Greenberg v. McGraw, 161 A.3d 976 , 989 n.12 (Pa. Super. 2017). - 16 - J-A01041-18 Second, IMM argues the trial court properly dismissed the complaint because Freeman’s claim is barred by the Workers’ Compensation Act.10 See 77 P.S. § 1 et seq.

12018–2018
Walacavage v. Excell 2000, Inc. green
pasuperct · 1984
1 sentence

1994Because a corporation must be represented by counsel in any action and cannot represent itself, Walacavage v. Excell 2000, Inc., 331 Pa.Superior Ct. 137, 480 A.2d 281 (1984), this court will not address the arguments in Freeman’s brief.

11994–1994

Where else courts name it

KS 45 (1988–2026) TX 17 (1987–2025) GA 15 (1997–2024) MA 13 (1968–2004) AL 10 (1890–2008) CA 9 (1968–2026) OH 8 (1997–2026) WA 7 (2013–2024) FL 6 (1990–2006) PA 6 (1994–2023) NY 5 (1981–2012) CO 4 (1995–2024) TN 4 (2006–2025) MS 3 (2011–2017) ID 3 (1967–1990) DC 3 (1991–2009) MO 3 (1989–2006) IL 3 (1999–2024) SC 2 (2019–2022) MI 2 (1994–2015) IN 2 (1985–2018)

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