46 Pennsylvania opinions name it 10 courts 1829–2025 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 |
|---|---|---|
Schmucker v. Nauglegreen2 sentences2000Roznowski v. Pennsylvania National Mutual Casualty Insurance Co., 343 Pa. Super. 7 , 13 n.3, 493 A.2d 775 , 778 n.3 (1985), citing Schmucker v. Naugle, 426 Pa. 203 , 231 A.2d 121 (1967). 2000Roznowski v. Pennsylvania National Mutual Casualty Insurance Co., 343 Pa. Super. 7 , 13 n.3, 493 A.2d 775 , 778 n.3 (1985), citing Schmucker v. Naugle, 426 Pa. 203 , 231 A.2d 121 (1967). | 2 | 3 |
Ross Development Co. v. Advanced Building Development, Inc.green2 sentences2015In determining whether arbitration is appropriate, “the trial court may only address questions of substantive arbitrability such-as whether there is a valid arbitration agreement and whether the disputed claim is within the scope of that agreement.” Ross Development Company v. Advanced Building Development, Inc., 803 A.2d 194, 199 (Pa.Super.2002). “[T]he question of substantive arbitration is for the courts while procedural arbitration is left to the arbitrators.” 1 Id. at 197 . 2015In determining whether arbitration is appropriate, “the trial court may only address questions of substantive arbitrability such-as whether there is a valid arbitration agreement and whether the disputed claim is within the scope of that agreement.” Ross Development Company v. Advanced Building Development, Inc., 803 A.2d 194, 199 (Pa.Super.2002). “[T]he question of substantive arbitration is for the courts while procedural arbitration is left to the arbitrators.” 1 Id. at 197 . | 1 | 3 |
Commonwealth v. Birchgreen1 sentence2025Evidence of the following is not admissible- -on behalf of any party--either to prove or disprove the validity or amount of a disputed claim or to impeach by a prior inconsistent statement or a contradiction: (1) furnishing, promising, or offering--or accepting, promising to accept, or offering to accept--a valuable consideration in compromising or attempting to compromise the claim; and (Footnote Continued Next Page) - 11 - J-S09023-25 important that, where the determination of a defendant’s guilt or innocence is dependent upon the credibility of a prosecution witness, an adequate opportunity | 1 | 1 |
Styers v. Bedford Grange Mutual Insurancegreen1 sentence2024Liquidator filed its Sur-Reply Brief on November 13, 2023, in which it pointed out that SureTec raised new arguments in its Reply Brief that it could and 900 A.2d 895, 899 (Pa. Super. 2006) (quoting 220 P’ship v. Phila. | 1 | 1 |
Hooker v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Co.green1 sentence2020Our sister court affirmed, concluding that a party “[t]aking responsibility for some items of damage while contesting responsibility for others does not suggest that it is an offer to compromise a disputed claim.” Hooker, 880 A.2d at 85 (responding to the appellant’s argument “that the trial court erred by - 16 - J-A04010-20 permitting evidence of minor damages … that were repaired”). | 1 | 1 |
Commonwealth v. Radeckigreen1 sentence2019See Commonwealth v. Radecki, 180 A.3d 441, 457 (Pa.Super. 2018) (indicating evidence regarding civil settlement reached before the criminal trial commenced was admissible to show that the defendant sought to keep the complainant quiet); Melnyczenko, supra at 100 (holding fact that defendant offered to make restitution to burglary victim was properly admitted as consciousness of guilt). | 1 | 1 |
Commonwealth v. Melnyczenkogreen1 sentence2019See Commonwealth v. Radecki, 180 A.3d 441, 457 (Pa.Super. 2018) (indicating evidence regarding civil settlement reached before the criminal trial commenced was admissible to show that the defendant sought to keep the complainant quiet); Melnyczenko, supra at 100 (holding fact that defendant offered to make restitution to burglary victim was properly admitted as consciousness of guilt). | 1 | 1 |
McMullen v. Kutzgreen1 sentence2019See Pa.R.E. 408; see also McMullen v. Kutz, 925 A.2d 832, 835 (Pa.Super. 2007). | 1 | 1 |
Jones, H., Aplt. v. Ott, R.green1 sentence2018See Shinal, 162 A.3d at 451 n.26; R.R. at 907a-08a; accord Jones, 191 A.3d at 791 n.13. | 1 | 1 |
Shinal, M., et ux, Aplts. v. Toms M.D., S.green1 sentence2018See Shinal, 162 A.3d at 451 n.26; R.R. at 907a-08a; accord Jones, 191 A.3d at 791 n.13. | 1 | 1 |
Peak v. COM., UNEMPLOYMENT COMP. BD.green1 sentence2015The applicable regulation provides: The issuance of subpoenas to compel the attendance of witnesses and the production of books, papers, correspondence, memoranda and other records and documents, may be obtained on application to the Board, referee, or at any local employment office. 34 Pa. Code §101.31 . 6 Substantial evidence is defined as “such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion.” Peak v. Unemployment Compensation Board of Review, 501 A.2d 1383, 1387 (Pa. 1985). | 1 | 1 |
Flores v. Unemployment Compensation Board of Reviewgreen1 sentence2008See Flores v. Unemployment Compensation Board of Review, 686 A.2d 66, 77 (Pa.Cmwlth.1996). | 1 | 1 |
Bethenergy Mines, Inc. v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal Boardgreen2 sentences2003See also Bethenergy Mines, Inc. v. WCAB (Sadvary), 524 Pa.235, 570 A.2d 84 (1990) (holding that termination of benefits because of a meretricious relationship was discretionary), rev'g 117 Pa.Cmwlth. 465 , 543 A.2d 1268 (1988). [6] Act of April 28, 1978, P.L. 202, No. 53, as amended, 2 Pa.C.S. §§ 501-508, 701-704. [1] As the parties did not question the workers' compensation judge's authority to determine paternity in Cairgle v. Am. 2003See also Bethenergy Mines, Inc. v. WCAB (Sadvary), 524 Pa.235, 570 A.2d 84 (1990) (holding that termination of benefits because of a meretricious relationship was discretionary), rev’g 117 Pa.Cmwlth. 465 , 543 A.2d 1268 (1988). . | 1 | 1 |
BethEnergy Mines, Inc. v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal Boardgreen2 sentences2003See also Bethenergy Mines, Inc. v. WCAB (Sadvary), 524 Pa.235, 570 A.2d 84 (1990) (holding that termination of benefits because of a meretricious relationship was discretionary), rev’g 117 Pa.Cmwlth. 465 , 543 A.2d 1268 (1988). . 2003See also Bethenergy Mines, Inc. v. WCAB (Sadvary), 524 Pa.235, 570 A.2d 84 (1990) (holding that termination of benefits because of a meretricious relationship was discretionary), rev’g 117 Pa.Cmwlth. 465 , 543 A.2d 1268 (1988). . | 1 | 1 |
Hoffer Transportation Co. v. Commonwealthgreen2 sentences2003Co. v. WCAB, 66 Pa.Cmwlth. 310 , 443 A.2d 1381, 1383 (1982). [5] For instance, with respect to the disputed claim of a surviving spouse, WCJ's have determined that a common law marriage existed between a claimant and a decedent, Brandywine Paperboard Mills v. WCAB (Zittle), 751 A.2d 1205 (Pa.Cmwlth.2000); that there was no common law marriage, Bowden v. WCAB, 31 Pa.Cmwlth. 476 , 376 A.2d 1033 (1977); and that a surviving spouse was involved in a meretricious relationship following a decedent's death, McCusker v. WCAB (Rushton Mining Co.), 145 Pa.Cmwlth.261, 603 A.2d 238 (1992). 2003Co. v. WCAB, 66 Pa.Cmwlth. 310 , 443 A.2d 1381, 1383 (1982). [5] For instance, with respect to the disputed claim of a surviving spouse, WCJ's have determined that a common law marriage existed between a claimant and a decedent, Brandywine Paperboard Mills v. WCAB (Zittle), 751 A.2d 1205 (Pa.Cmwlth.2000); that there was no common law marriage, Bowden v. WCAB, 31 Pa.Cmwlth. 476 , 376 A.2d 1033 (1977); and that a surviving spouse was involved in a meretricious relationship following a decedent's death, McCusker v. WCAB (Rushton Mining Co.), 145 Pa.Cmwlth.261, 603 A.2d 238 (1992). | 1 | 1 |
| Cox v. DEPARTMENT OF INS., STATEgreen | 1 | 1 |
| Shamokin Area School Authority v. Farfield Co.green | 1 | 1 |
| Buttermore v. Aliquippa Hospitalgreen | 1 | 1 |
| Hagerty Oil Co. v. Chester County Security Fund, Inc.green | 1 | 1 |
| Law v. MacKiegreen | 1 | 1 |
| Gallagher v. Viking Supply Corporationgreen | 1 | 1 |
| Coonan v. Baltimore & O. R.green | 1 | 1 |
| Boardman-Smith Corp. v. Shermangreen | 1 | 1 |
| West Point Cotton Mills v. Blythegreen | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Pennsylvania. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Christman v. Martin
green
2 sentences1931Where money is sent by a debtor to a creditor to apply on a disputed claim with a notice that it is to he in settlement of a larger demand, the debtor will be discharged if the creditor receive the money: Gas Co. v. Johnson, 123 Pa. 576 ; Ziegler v. McFarland, 147 Pa. 607 ; Christman v. Martin, 7 Pa. Superior Ct. 568 .” Where the facts are not disputed the court should declare the result: Crescent v. Weaver, 84 Pa. Superior Ct. 231 . 1924Where money is sent by a debtor to a creditor to apply on a disputed claim with a notice *50 that it is to be in settlement of a larger demand, the debtor will be discharged if the creditor receive the money: Gas Co. v. Johnson, 128 Pa. 576 ; Ziegler v. McFarland, 147 Pa. 607 ; Christman v. Martin, 7 Pa. Superior Ct. 568 . | 4 | 1907–1931 |
Ziegler v. McFarland
neutral
2 sentences1931Where money is sent by a debtor to a creditor to apply on a disputed claim with a notice that it is to he in settlement of a larger demand, the debtor will be discharged if the creditor receive the money: Gas Co. v. Johnson, 123 Pa. 576 ; Ziegler v. McFarland, 147 Pa. 607 ; Christman v. Martin, 7 Pa. Superior Ct. 568 .” Where the facts are not disputed the court should declare the result: Crescent v. Weaver, 84 Pa. Superior Ct. 231 . 1924Where money is sent by a debtor to a creditor to apply on a disputed claim with a notice *50 that it is to be in settlement of a larger demand, the debtor will be discharged if the creditor receive the money: Gas Co. v. Johnson, 128 Pa. 576 ; Ziegler v. McFarland, 147 Pa. 607 ; Christman v. Martin, 7 Pa. Superior Ct. 568 . | 4 | 1907–1931 |
Gingrich v. Commonwealth, Department of Transportation, Bureau of Driver Licensing
green
2 sentences2019Here, the only disputed requirement for relief on appeal is whether the conviction was "not reported for an extraordinarily extended period of time." See id. 2019Here, the only disputed requirement for relief on appeal is whether the conviction was “not reported for an extraordinarily extended period of time.” See id. | 2 | 2019–2019 |
S. Middaugh v. PennDOT, Bureau of Driver Licensing
green
2 sentences2019To that question, this Court, in Middaugh v. Department of Transportation, Bureau of Driver Licensing , 196 A.3d 1073 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2018) (en banc), recently clarified what may constitute an extraordinarily extended period of time for purposes of the Gingrich test. 2019To that question, this Court, in Middaugh v. Department of Transportation, Bureau of Driver Licensing, 196 A.3d 1073 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2018) (en banc), recently clarified what may constitute an extraordinarily extended period of time for purposes of the Gingrich test. | 2 | 2019–2019 |
Unemployment Compensation Board of Review of the Commonwealth v. Wright
green
2 sentences1985A long line of cases has interpreted this section of the statute to make the Board the ultimate finder of fact, e.g., Rodriguez v. Unemployment Compensation Board of Review, 48 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 65 , 408 A.2d 1191 (1979); Unemployment Compensation Board of Review of Leonhart, 24 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 196 , 353 A.2d 925 (1976); Unemployment Compensation Board of Review v. Wright, 21 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 637 , 347 A.2d 328 (1975). 1985A long line of cases has interpreted this section of the statute to make the Board the ultimate finder of fact, e.g., Rodriguez v. Unemployment Compensation Board of Review, 48 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 65 , 408 A.2d 1191 (1979); Unemployment Compensation Board of Review of Leonhart, 24 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 196 , 353 A.2d 925 (1976); Unemployment Compensation Board of Review v. Wright, 21 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 637 , 347 A.2d 328 (1975). | 2 | 1985–1985 |
Unemployment Compensation Board of Review v. Leonhart
green
2 sentences1985A long line of cases has interpreted this section of the statute to make the Board the ultimate finder of fact, e.g., Rodriguez v. Unemployment Compensation Board of Review, 48 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 65 , 408 A.2d 1191 (1979); Unemployment Compensation Board of Review of Leonhart, 24 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 196 , 353 A.2d 925 (1976); Unemployment Compensation Board of Review v. Wright, 21 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 637 , 347 A.2d 328 (1975). 1985A long line of cases has interpreted this section of the statute to make the Board the ultimate finder of fact, e.g., Rodriguez v. Unemployment Compensation Board of Review, 48 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 65 , 408 A.2d 1191 (1979); Unemployment Compensation Board of Review of Leonhart, 24 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 196 , 353 A.2d 925 (1976); Unemployment Compensation Board of Review v. Wright, 21 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 637 , 347 A.2d 328 (1975). | 2 | 1985–1985 |
Rodriguez v. Commonwealth
green
2 sentences1985A long line of cases has interpreted this section of the statute to make the Board the ultimate finder of fact, e.g., Rodriguez v. Unemployment Compensation Board of Review, 48 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 65 , 408 A.2d 1191 (1979); Unemployment Compensation Board of Review of Leonhart, 24 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 196 , 353 A.2d 925 (1976); Unemployment Compensation Board of Review v. Wright, 21 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 637 , 347 A.2d 328 (1975). 1985A long line of cases has interpreted this section of the statute to make the Board the ultimate finder of fact, e.g., Rodriguez v. Unemployment Compensation Board of Review, 48 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 65 , 408 A.2d 1191 (1979); Unemployment Compensation Board of Review of Leonhart, 24 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 196 , 353 A.2d 925 (1976); Unemployment Compensation Board of Review v. Wright, 21 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 637 , 347 A.2d 328 (1975). | 2 | 1985–1985 |
Washington N. Gas Co. v. Johnson
green
2 sentences1931Where money is sent by a debtor to a creditor to apply on a disputed claim with a notice that it is to he in settlement of a larger demand, the debtor will be discharged if the creditor receive the money: Gas Co. v. Johnson, 123 Pa. 576 ; Ziegler v. McFarland, 147 Pa. 607 ; Christman v. Martin, 7 Pa. Superior Ct. 568 .” Where the facts are not disputed the court should declare the result: Crescent v. Weaver, 84 Pa. Superior Ct. 231 . 1915“Where money (a check) is sent by a debtor to a creditor to apply on a disputed claim, with notice that it is to be in full settlement of a larger demand, the debtor will be discharged if the creditor receive the money: Washington Gas Co. v. Johnson, 123 Pa. 576 ; Ziegler v. McFarland, 147 Pa. 607; Christman v. Martin, 7 Pa. Superior Ct. 568”; Bernstein v. Hirsch, 33 Pa. Superior Ct. 87 . | 2 | 1915–1931 |
Bernstein v. Hirsch
neutral
2 sentences1924It was held in Bernstein v. Hirsch, 33 Pa. Superior Ct. 87 , that where in case of dispute an amount is offered as payment in full, the party to whom it is tendered must refuse it or accept on the condition involved. 1915“Where money (a check) is sent by a debtor to a creditor to apply on a disputed claim, with notice that it is to be in full settlement of a larger demand, the debtor will be discharged if the creditor receive the money: Washington Gas Co. v. Johnson, 123 Pa. 576 ; Ziegler v. McFarland, 147 Pa. 607; Christman v. Martin, 7 Pa. Superior Ct. 568”; Bernstein v. Hirsch, 33 Pa. Superior Ct. 87 . | 2 | 1915–1924 |
Commonwealth v. Young
green
1 sentence2017Here, the testimony was not offered “to prove or disprove the validity or amount of a disputed claim or to impeach by a prior inconsistent statement or contradiction.” See id. | 1 | 2017–2017 |
Rochester MacHine Corp. v. Mulach Steel Corp.
green
1 sentence2005Id. | 1 | 2005–2005 |
Bowden v. Commonwealth
green
2 sentences2003For instance, with respect to the disputed claim of a surviving spouse, WCJ's have determined that a common law marriage existed between a claimant and a decedent, Brandywine Paperboard Mills v. WCAB (Zittle), 751 A.2d 1205 (Pa.Cmwlth.2000); that there was no common law marriage, Bowden v. WCAB, 31 Pa.Cmwlth. 476 , 376 A.2d 1033 (1977); and that a surviving spouse was involved in a meretricious relationship following a decedent’s death, McCusker v. WCAB (Rushton Mining Co.), 145 Pa.Cmwlth.261, 603 A.2d 238 (1992). 2003For instance, with respect to the disputed claim of a surviving spouse, WCJ's have determined that a common law marriage existed between a claimant and a decedent, Brandywine Paperboard Mills v. WCAB (Zittle), 751 A.2d 1205 (Pa.Cmwlth.2000); that there was no common law marriage, Bowden v. WCAB, 31 Pa.Cmwlth. 476 , 376 A.2d 1033 (1977); and that a surviving spouse was involved in a meretricious relationship following a decedent’s death, McCusker v. WCAB (Rushton Mining Co.), 145 Pa.Cmwlth.261, 603 A.2d 238 (1992). | 1 | 2003–2003 |
Bennyhoff v. Pappert
green
2 sentences2003Moreover, this Court in Bennyhoff, supra, found that the appellants had waived such an issue even though the disputed instruction was included in the reproduced record, when it was not also in the certified record. 2003Bennyhoff, 790 A.2d at 318 . | 1 | 2003–2003 |
McCusker v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal Board
green
2 sentences2003Co. v. WCAB, 66 Pa.Cmwlth. 310 , 443 A.2d 1381, 1383 (1982). [5] For instance, with respect to the disputed claim of a surviving spouse, WCJ's have determined that a common law marriage existed between a claimant and a decedent, Brandywine Paperboard Mills v. WCAB (Zittle), 751 A.2d 1205 (Pa.Cmwlth.2000); that there was no common law marriage, Bowden v. WCAB, 31 Pa.Cmwlth. 476 , 376 A.2d 1033 (1977); and that a surviving spouse was involved in a meretricious relationship following a decedent's death, McCusker v. WCAB (Rushton Mining Co.), 145 Pa.Cmwlth.261, 603 A.2d 238 (1992). 2003For instance, with respect to the disputed claim of a surviving spouse, WCJ's have determined that a common law marriage existed between a claimant and a decedent, Brandywine Paperboard Mills v. WCAB (Zittle), 751 A.2d 1205 (Pa.Cmwlth.2000); that there was no common law marriage, Bowden v. WCAB, 31 Pa.Cmwlth. 476 , 376 A.2d 1033 (1977); and that a surviving spouse was involved in a meretricious relationship following a decedent’s death, McCusker v. WCAB (Rushton Mining Co.), 145 Pa.Cmwlth.261, 603 A.2d 238 (1992). | 1 | 2003–2003 |
Brandywine Paperboard Mills v. Workers' Compensation Appeal Board
green
2 sentences2003Co. v. WCAB, 66 Pa.Cmwlth. 310 , 443 A.2d 1381, 1383 (1982). [5] For instance, with respect to the disputed claim of a surviving spouse, WCJ's have determined that a common law marriage existed between a claimant and a decedent, Brandywine Paperboard Mills v. WCAB (Zittle), 751 A.2d 1205 (Pa.Cmwlth.2000); that there was no common law marriage, Bowden v. WCAB, 31 Pa.Cmwlth. 476 , 376 A.2d 1033 (1977); and that a surviving spouse was involved in a meretricious relationship following a decedent's death, McCusker v. WCAB (Rushton Mining Co.), 145 Pa.Cmwlth.261, 603 A.2d 238 (1992). 2003For instance, with respect to the disputed claim of a surviving spouse, WCJ's have determined that a common law marriage existed between a claimant and a decedent, Brandywine Paperboard Mills v. WCAB (Zittle), 751 A.2d 1205 (Pa.Cmwlth.2000); that there was no common law marriage, Bowden v. WCAB, 31 Pa.Cmwlth. 476 , 376 A.2d 1033 (1977); and that a surviving spouse was involved in a meretricious relationship following a decedent’s death, McCusker v. WCAB (Rushton Mining Co.), 145 Pa.Cmwlth.261, 603 A.2d 238 (1992). | 1 | 2003–2003 |
| Fidelity & Casualty Co. of New York v. Nello L. Teer Co. neutral | 1 | 2002–2002 |
| Santiago v. State Farm Insurance green | 1 | 2002–2002 |
| Roznowski v. PA. NAT. MUT. CAS. INS. CO. green | 1 | 2000–2000 |
| Giant Markets, Inc. v. Sigma Marketing Systems, Inc. green | 1 | 1996–1996 |
| Silver v. Mendel neutral | 1 | 1991–1991 |
| Silver, Marc I. v. Mendel, M. Mark, Individually, Murray, Daniel E., Individually, and M. Mark Mendel, Ltd green | 1 | 1991–1991 |
| Mendel v. Silver green | 1 | 1991–1991 |
| Rafferty Estate green | 1 | 1987–1987 |
| Sharpless's Estate neutral | 1 | 1987–1987 |
| Farmland Industries, Inc. v. Commonwealth, Unemployment Compensation Board of Review green | 1 | 1987–1987 |
| Durant v. McKelvey green | 1 | 1982–1982 |
| Rochester MacHine Corp. v. Mulach Steel Corp. green | 1 | 1982–1982 |
| Greenough v. Greenough green | 1 | 1977–1977 |
| Dodd v. City of Atlanta green | 1 | 1963–1963 |
| Girard Life Insurance v. City of Philadelphia green | 1 | 1963–1963 |
| Bower v. United Gas Improvement Co. neutral | 1 | 1963–1963 |
| Rochester Building & Loan Ass'n v. Beaver Valley Water Co. neutral | 1 | 1963–1963 |
| Richards v. Citizens Natural Gas Co. green | 1 | 1937–1937 |
| Taussig v. United Security Life Insurance & Trust Co. neutral | 1 | 1937–1937 |
| Williams & Manning v. Southern Mutual Insurance green | 1 | 1937–1937 |
| Crescent Corrugated Paper Products Co. v. Weaver Paper Co. neutral | 1 | 1931–1931 |
| Laidley v. Rowe green | 1 | 1929–1929 |
| Potter v. Hartnett green | 1 | 1925–1925 |
| Slocum v. Perkins neutral | 1 | 1829–1829 |
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.