Get above the noise
Log in for answers tailored to you — saved chats, your topics, and the full IJR suite.
S. Burda v. DHS
Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2019-12-17
The case involved Steven Burda's appeal of decisions by the Department of Human Services discontinuing SNAP benefits for his household and Medical Assistance benefits for himself, his wife, and daughter after their income exceeded program eligibility limits. Following multiple hearings, stipulations, and prior adjudications, an ALJ denied the appeals based on income calculations from late 2015 and early 2016, and the Bureau of Hearings and Appeals affirmed. Burda petitioned for review, arguing issues with evidence and expense considerations. The Commonwealth Court affirmed the order, finding that the wife's income alone surpassed the limits for both programs even after allowable deductions, with no errors in the eligibility determinations under applicable regulations.
healthcarefederal power
A.G. Wright v. PSP
Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2019-12-12
The case involved Anthony Glen Wright's petition challenging the Pennsylvania State Police's enforcement of SORNA and related amendments (Act 10 and Act 29) against him, following his 2009 convictions for sexual offenses committed in 2006. Wright, who was subject to Megan's Law II at the time of his conviction, argued that the newer laws' registration, notification, and reporting requirements violated ex post facto principles under the state and federal constitutions, imposed additional punishment like extended probation, and damaged his reputation, citing Commonwealth v. Muniz. PSP filed a preliminary objection in the nature of a demurrer, asserting that the laws essentially recreated the constitutional requirements of Megan's Law II. The Commonwealth Court overruled the demurrer, finding that Wright's well-pled allegations of punitive effects and reputational harm stated potentially valid claims that the Acts' provisions were comparable to public shaming and imposed new obligations. The court directed PSP to file an answer within 30 days.
criminal lawcivil rightsprocedure
A.J. Stewart v. Bureau of Driver Licensing
Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2019-12-12
The case involved Adam Jay Stewart, who had multiple convictions for underage drinking that resulted in driver's license suspensions, petitioning for a probationary license under Section 1554 of the Pennsylvania Vehicle Code after serving some of those suspensions. The Department of Transportation denied the petition, a hearing officer recommended affirming the denial, and the Executive Deputy Secretary upheld that recommendation by denying exceptions. The Commonwealth Court affirmed, holding that Stewart failed to meet the statutory thresholds requiring at least five years of cumulative suspensions and three years of credit at the time the petition was filed, and that the Executive Deputy Secretary had authority to act on the exceptions under the Administrative Code.
criminal lawprocedure
S. Jones v. WCAB (SEPTA)
Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2019-11-25
Steven Jones, a maintenance custodian driver for SEPTA, sustained work-related injuries in 2001 from falling through a grate, leading to ongoing workers' compensation benefits for conditions including cervical spine and shoulder issues after earlier proceedings. In 2017, the employer filed a termination petition based on an independent medical examination concluding full recovery as of March 2, 2017, while Jones filed related petitions seeking reinstatement and review of utilization review determinations that certain treatments were unreasonable. The Workers' Compensation Judge granted the termination petition and denied Jones's petitions, a decision affirmed by the Workers' Compensation Appeal Board. The Commonwealth Court affirmed, holding that the medical evidence supported full recovery and rendered the utilization review petitions moot because post-termination treatment could not be causally related to the work injury.
labor & employment
E.F. Connell v. UCBR
Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2019-11-21
The case involved Eugene F. Connell, who was terminated by his employer for violating work policies by using his cell phone for non-work purposes, leaving work without authorization for 90 minutes, and falsifying his timesheet to claim a full eight-hour shift. After a grievance settlement led to his reinstatement with a suspension, Connell sought unemployment compensation benefits, which were denied by the Unemployment Compensation Board of Review under Section 402(e) of the UC Law for willful misconduct. The court affirmed the denial, reasoning that the falsification of time records alone constituted willful misconduct, as it was a deliberate violation not excused by the claimant's personal reasons or any claimed permission for the absence.
labor & employment
A. Robinson v. PBPP
Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2019-11-21
Anthony Robinson, a parolee, petitioned the Commonwealth Court for review of an order by the Pennsylvania Board of Probation and Parole denying him credit against his maximum sentence for time spent at Kintock-Erie Community Corrections Facility and Luzerne Treatment Center, as well as for unspecified additional periods in custody. The Board had held an evidentiary hearing on the facility credits but concluded neither program imposed sufficient restrictions on liberty to qualify as confinement equivalent to incarceration. The court affirmed the Board's decision, finding that testimony about the facilities' conditions (such as the absence of bars or fences and the availability of unescorted passes) supported the denial of credit. It also held that Robinson's request for additional credit was waived because it lacked sufficient particularity regarding dates and grounds at the administrative stage.
criminal lawprocedure