Zoran Popovich

This case involved a homeowners association that recorded a lien against a unit owner's townhouse for unpaid maintenance fees under the Uniform Planned Community Act and later sought a writ of execution to sell the property to satisfy the lien amount plus additional fees. The homeowner moved to strike the writ, arguing lack of proper notice and that no judgment had been entered. The court affirmed the trial court's order striking the writ of execution. It reasoned that a recorded lien alone does not constitute a judgment upon which execution may issue, and the association was required to commence a civil action by filing a complaint to obtain a judgment before proceeding to execution and sale.

propertyprocedure

Maryland Casualty sued Odyssey Contracting and Odyssey Painting for breach of contract, claiming they failed to pay $140,528 in workers’ compensation insurance premiums plus interest. Odyssey counterclaimed that the insurer had used an improper rate classification to inflate the premiums owed. The trial court granted Maryland Casualty’s motion for judgment on the pleadings, and the Superior Court affirmed. The court held that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction over the rate dispute because Odyssey had not first pursued the available administrative remedy before the Pennsylvania Compensation Rating Bureau as required by statute. The opinion explained that parties must exhaust statutory administrative remedies before seeking judicial relief, and that the grievance process established under the Workers’ Compensation Law satisfied due process even if its rules were not immediately obvious to the public.

business & regulatorylabor & employmentprocedure

The case involved Gloria Pantelis's petition to modify or correct an arbitration award of $8,500 in uninsured motorist benefits following two car accidents, one of which allegedly caused a herniated cervical disk. After Erie Insurance paid first-party medical benefits up to policy limits for the second accident but denied the UM claim, an arbitration panel awarded limited damages, and Pantelis argued the panel erred by allowing a causation defense, excluding evidence of the first-party payments, and admitting certain medical records. The trial court refused to alter the award, finding that payment of first-party benefits does not bar disputing UM coverage absent frivolous or bad-faith refusal. The Superior Court affirmed, holding that the insurer could contest causation for UM benefits without admitting liability through prior payments and that Pantelis failed to show prejudice from the evidentiary rulings under the standards for reviewing statutory arbitration awards.

business & regulatoryproceduretorts & liability

This case involved Ted Allan Shank's appeal of his convictions for first-degree murder, kidnapping, aggravated assault, robbery, and conspiracy after he and co-conspirators lured and fatally beat Richard Gemmil following a bar dispute over a pool game, then disposed of the body. The trial court sentenced Shank to life without parole for the murder plus consecutive terms for the other offenses. On appeal, Shank challenged the sufficiency of the evidence for intent to kill and causation, the admission of hearsay and expert testimony, and whether his aggravated assault convictions should merge with the murder conviction. The Superior Court of Pennsylvania rejected these claims, finding the evidence sufficient to support the verdicts, no evidentiary errors, and no merger under the law, and therefore affirmed the judgment of sentence.

criminal lawprocedure

In Commonwealth v. Bricker, the appellant challenged his convictions on multiple counts of drug possession, possession with intent to deliver, conspiracy, and paraphernalia offenses arising from two 2003 police searches of his Fayette County residence that recovered crack cocaine, marijuana, cash, and drug-related items from him, his son, and other individuals present. The Superior Court affirmed the judgments of sentence for all convictions from the July search and most from the September search, holding that the evidence was sufficient to support the verdicts when viewed in the light most favorable to the Commonwealth and that the trial court did not err in its evidentiary rulings. The court vacated only the PWID conviction from the second search and remanded for a new trial because the trial court improperly permitted the Commonwealth to amend the information after its case-in-chief to charge a larger drug quantity found on a third party.

criminal lawprocedure

This case concerned whether a television station had a right to access and copy an audiotape of a phone call that was played during a preliminary hearing in a criminal prosecution for homicide and related charges. The Superior Court of Pennsylvania reversed the trial court's decision granting the station access, holding that the audiotape was not a public judicial document at the pre-trial stage and that neither common law nor constitutional rights provided the media with access to record it. The court reasoned that while there is a tradition of open criminal proceedings, not all evidence introduced at preliminary hearings qualifies as public judicial documents subject to media copying, and access could impair the defendant's fair trial rights.

criminal lawprocedurefree speech