Bernard L. McGinley

This case involved Charles E. Eckenrode, who owned a home zoned for single-family use in Pittsburgh and rented it to six unrelated tenants, exceeding the zoning code's limit of three unrelated persons per family. The city charged him with violating the zoning code for failing to obtain a certificate of occupancy after the change in use, resulting in a conviction and $15,000 in fines by the trial court. Eckenrode appealed, arguing there was no permit requirement, he was convicted under a non-existent code section, and the ordinance violated equal protection and due process under the Fourteenth Amendment. The Commonwealth Court affirmed the conviction, holding that the zoning ordinance is valid economic and social legislation rationally related to public health, safety, and welfare, and that constitutional challenges under rational basis review fail.

propertycriminal law

This case involved an employer's petition to review and suspend a widow's ongoing workers' compensation fatal claim benefits after her husband's death in a work-related car accident, on the grounds that she was capable of self-support. The Workers' Compensation Judge dismissed the petition, the Appeal Board affirmed, and the Commonwealth Court upheld that decision. The court reasoned that Section 307 of the Workers' Compensation Act, as interpreted in prior precedent like Oknefski, provides no mechanism to terminate established spousal death benefits for widows based on self-support capability, and extending such a remedy would create an equal protection violation by treating widows and widowers differently. The opinion declined to address the constitutional claim separately, finding no statutory basis for suspension.

labor & employmentcivil rights

This case involved a challenge to Sewickley Township Ordinance 2012-6, which rezoned two small adjacent parcels (a 1.5-acre township-owned former school building and a .69-acre private vacant lot) from public facilities and rural village districts to community commercial zoning. The Sewickley Township Zoning Hearing Board found the rezoning created an illegal spot zone that singled out the parcels for different treatment primarily for the economic benefit of the private owners and could create traffic or safety issues. The Court of Common Pleas of Westmoreland County reversed the ZHB's decision, and the Commonwealth Court affirmed that reversal, upholding the ordinance as valid.

propertybusiness & regulatory

The case involved the Keyes family appealing the Zoning Hearing Board of East Whiteland Township's grant of variances and a special exception to allow expansion of a dog grooming, daycare, and boarding business on a property that became a non-conforming use after rezoning. The Court of Common Pleas affirmed the Board's decision, and the Commonwealth Court also affirmed. The court reasoned that the business demonstrated a hardship because newer competitors offered indoor facilities and artificial turf, making the expansion essential for competitiveness and viability, and that the proposal would have minimal impact on the surrounding neighborhood, satisfying the ordinance requirements for the special exception and variances.

propertybusiness & regulatory

This case concerned tax assessments on 152 unsold residential condominium units and one commercial unit owned by Dockside Associates in a Philadelphia building that had been converted to condominiums. Dockside appealed the assessments, arguing for a lower collective valuation based on an income capitalization approach treating the units as a fractured condominium, while the City of Philadelphia assessed each unit separately using a sales comparison approach based on individual market sales. The trial court upheld the city's assessments, excluded certain prior appraisals offered for impeachment, and rejected Dockside's valuation. The Commonwealth Court affirmed, holding that the trial court's exclusion of dissimilar prior appraisals was proper and that its findings were supported by substantial evidence.

taxesproperty

This case involved a workers' compensation claim by Lallie Robinson against Service Plus Delivery Systems, Inc. and the State Workers' Insurance Fund after a 2006 work-related motor vehicle accident. The employer and insurer filed a review petition seeking to offset or recover benefits paid to Robinson based on his separate $95,000 settlement of an underinsured motorist claim arising from the same incident. The Workers' Compensation Judge granted the petition, finding that the employer had not waived its subrogation rights, and the Workers' Compensation Appeal Board affirmed. The Commonwealth Court affirmed, holding that under Section 319 of the Workers' Compensation Act, the employer's right to subrogation is absolute to prevent double recovery once liability for benefits is established and payments are made, regardless of the timing of the third-party settlement.

labor & employment

The case involved the Tanglwood North Community Association suing homeowner Patrice Boystak for constructing a garage allegedly in violation of restrictive covenants that required prior approval and prohibited structures within a 50-foot setback from the street right-of-way. The Court of Common Pleas granted partial summary judgment to the Association, declaring a violation and ordering removal of the garage within 30 days. On appeal, the Commonwealth Court reversed and remanded, reasoning that genuine issues of material fact existed regarding the date Boystak filed her permit application and whether the Architectural Committee responded within the required 30-day period under the association's rules, making summary judgment improper.

propertyprocedure

The case concerned UGI Penn Natural Gas, Inc.'s condemnation of a permanent pipeline easement and temporary construction easement across the Lauchles' 357-acre property in Lycoming County under Section 1511 of the Pennsylvania Business Corporation Law. The Lauchles challenged the takings in equity actions, claiming they were for private rather than public purposes, exceeded what was necessary, and that the posted bond was inadequate. The Court of Common Pleas overruled the challenges and approved the condemnations, and the Commonwealth Court affirmed the lower court's ruling that the Lauchles' equity actions were untimely filed.

propertyprocedurebusiness & regulatory

This case involved UGI Penn Natural Gas, Inc.'s condemnation of a permanent pipeline easement and temporary construction easement across the Lauchles' 357-acre property in Lycoming County, Pennsylvania, under the Pennsylvania Business Corporation Law for a natural gas pipeline project. The Lauchles filed answers and equity actions raising objections including lack of public purpose, excessive taking, and inadequate bond amounts, but the Court of Common Pleas approved the condemnations and bonds. On appeal, the Commonwealth Court affirmed, holding that the objections were either untimely or meritless because the project was an active, non-speculative public undertaking, the scope of the taking was not excessive, and no evidence showed the condemnations were arbitrary or for private benefit.

propertybusiness & regulatoryprocedure

The case involved former members of Philadelphia's Board of Revision of Taxes suing the City over salary reductions imposed by ordinance and the transfer of the Board's functions, following a prior Pennsylvania Supreme Court ruling that the City could shift assessment duties but not eliminate the Board's appellate role. The Board Members sought back pay for their statutory terms, attorney fees for litigation to restore functions and obtain payments, and post-judgment interest after the salary ordinance was invalidated. The Court of Common Pleas granted summary judgment awarding back pay, certain attorney fees, and interest. On appeal, the Commonwealth Court reversed awards of attorney fees for pre-invalidation opposition to the ordinance, vacated and remanded the interest amount and the hourly rate used for calculating reasonable attorney fees, and affirmed the remaining awards of back pay and fees tied to enforcing payment after the invalidation.

labor & employmentprocedure

This case involved a workers' compensation claim petition filed by Ralph Dailey against his employer, Ziegenfuss Drilling, Inc., seeking benefits for injuries including a right ankle fracture, dislocated hip, and other trauma sustained in a March 2011 motor vehicle accident. The employer contested the claim on the grounds that Dailey was not acting in the course and scope of his employment at the time, as the accident occurred while he was traveling after dropping off equipment at a company lot. The Workers' Compensation Judge granted the petition, finding the claimant was in the course of employment during the equipment drop-off as the final task of the day and awarding benefits plus attorney fees; the Workers' Compensation Appeal Board affirmed and modified the decision. On appeal, the Commonwealth Court affirmed, holding that the facts established the injury arose in the course of employment and that the fee agreement reasonably included a percentage of medical expense reimbursements.

labor & employment

Anthonee Patterson, a church elder and minister, sued Bishop Kenneth Shelton individually and as president of the board of a corporate trustee, alleging that Shelton and his faction had misappropriated church funds, paid improper salaries, and used assets donated for religious purposes for personal expenses following a leadership dispute after the prior bishop's death in 1991. The Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County granted Shelton's motion to dismiss, ruling that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction over the claims. The Commonwealth Court affirmed the dismissal, holding that civil courts cannot exercise jurisdiction over internal church governance, leadership succession, or the control and use of property held in trust for religious purposes. The decision rested on the principle that such disputes are ecclesiastical in nature and beyond the reach of secular courts under established precedent separating church and state matters.

religious libertypropertyprocedure

This case involved two Philadelphia properties owned by N. Park Development LLC that were sold at a sheriff's sale after the City obtained judgments for delinquent real estate taxes. Sahil Singhal purchased the properties at the sale, but Delanco Federal Savings Bank, which held mortgages on them, filed petitions to redeem the properties under 53 P.S. §7293(a) within nine months of the sheriff's deeds, asserting that the properties had been occupied as residences. The trial court granted the redemption petitions, required the Bank to pay Singhal the statutory amounts including the bid prices plus costs and interest, and permanently enjoined Singhal from asserting any claims to the properties. On appeal, Singhal argued that the properties were vacant and that the trial court erred in its factual findings and evidentiary rulings. The Commonwealth Court affirmed, holding that the trial court correctly determined the properties were not vacant based on the tenants' continued residence and that excluding certain testimony was not an abuse of discretion.

propertytaxesprocedure

The case involved Anthony Tyrone Davis, who was convicted in Lancaster County in 1994 of rape and related charges and sentenced to 6-20 years in prison. Years after a subsequent consecutive sentence in Luzerne County for prison assaults, Davis filed pro se motions in Lancaster County Court claiming his original sentence had expired and seeking discharge plus removal of the sentence from records, along with requests for transcripts. The Lancaster County Court treated the filings as untimely PCRA petitions, dismissed them for lack of jurisdiction, and denied the transcript requests. On appeal, the Commonwealth Court affirmed, holding that the claims concerned the Department of Corrections' authority to incarcerate rather than the validity of the conviction or sentence, that PCRA time limits barred relief, and that no demonstrable need justified providing transcripts at public expense.

criminal lawprocedure

The case involved taxpayers John G. Myers and Cecelia A. Reihl who purchased goods at BJ’s Wholesale Club using coupons and sought a refund of Pennsylvania sales tax that BJ’s had collected on the full price rather than the discounted amount. After their class action lawsuit in common pleas court was stayed for failure to exhaust administrative remedies, the taxpayers obtained a letter ruling from the Department of Revenue confirming that the tax was properly calculated because the coupons were not adequately described on the receipts, and they unsuccessfully sought reconsideration. They then appealed the letter rulings to the Board of Finance and Revenue, which declined to review them on the ground that it lacked authority over such advisory opinions. The Commonwealth Court sustained the Commonwealth’s application for summary relief and dismissed the taxpayers’ petition for review with prejudice, holding that letter rulings are not appealable orders subject to Board review and that only decisions from the Board of Appeals may be appealed in that manner.

taxesprocedurebusiness & regulatory

This case involved a workers' compensation claim by Edward M. Gower, Jr., a truck driver who alleged a lower back injury from three incidents on May 10, 2012, while working for Haines & Kibblehouse, Inc. Gower filed claim, penalty, and review petitions after the employer issued a temporary notice of compensation but later denied liability; the employer filed a termination petition alleging full recovery. The Workers' Compensation Judge partially granted the claim petition by awarding temporary total and then partial disability benefits before terminating all benefits as of November 30, 2012, denied the penalty and review petitions, and granted the termination petition, findings that were affirmed by the Workers' Compensation Appeal Board. The Commonwealth Court affirmed, holding that the WCJ's credibility determinations regarding the competing medical experts were adequately explained and supported by substantial evidence, that the termination of employment was reasonable based on the credited facts, and that any procedural objections to the independent medical examination were waived.

labor & employment

This case involved an employer's challenge to an award of unemployment benefits to a former employee fired from her role at a group home for allegedly violating policies against mistreating residents or neglecting their needs. The Unemployment Compensation Board of Review had affirmed a referee's decision granting benefits after finding that the claimant's actions—asking a resident about attending a football game (which he joined without being forced) and responding to questions from the resident and his girlfriend about sexual activity—did not constitute willful misconduct under Section 402(e) of the Unemployment Compensation Law. The Commonwealth Court affirmed the Board's order, holding that substantial evidence supported the findings that the resident was not coerced and that the claimant acted responsibly without insensitivity or negligence, and that the employer failed to prove the claimant violated a known policy. The court noted the Board's role as fact-finder and the lack of competent evidence showing misconduct.

labor & employment

This case involved a workers' compensation claim petition filed by Janet Drummond, the alleged dependent of deceased employee Tyrone Drummond, seeking benefits for the specific loss of use of his right leg. Decedent, a teacher, suffered a work-related knee injury in 2003 that led to surgery, but he later developed ulcers and infections due to obesity and diabetes, resulting in toe and below-knee amputations before his death in 2010. The Workers' Compensation Judge denied the petition, finding insufficient evidence that the work injury caused the leg loss, and the Appeal Board affirmed. The Commonwealth Court upheld the denial, holding that the WCJ properly credited the employer's expert over the claimant's on causation issues and that the claimant's medical opinion improperly relied on another physician without independent analysis. The court emphasized that credibility determinations by the WCJ are binding when supported by substantial evidence.

labor & employment

The case involved multiple individual appellants challenging actions by the Westmoreland County Tax Claim Bureau along with several mineral holdings companies in a dispute over tax claims. The Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania issued an order on November 17, 2015, designating a prior September 1, 2015 memorandum opinion in the matter as a formal reported opinion. No substantive decision or reasoning appears in the provided excerpt, which is limited to this procedural designation in a tax-related proceeding.

taxesproperty

The case involved Ryan Anthony Wright, who was on parole from a 2008 robbery and conspiracy sentence when he was arrested in 2012 on new firearms charges, leading to a 2013 conviction and five-to-ten-year sentence. The Pennsylvania Board of Probation and Parole revoked his parole, recommitted him as a convicted parole violator for 24 months backtime, and recalculated his maximum sentence date on the original term as June 18, 2017, after crediting pre-revocation detention time to the new sentence. Wright sought administrative relief claiming additional credit for time spent under a Board detainer from 2012 to 2014. The Commonwealth Court affirmed the Board's action, holding that under controlling precedent, backtime service on the original sentence begins only upon parole revocation, so the period between the new sentencing and revocation was properly applied to the new term.

criminal law