Search for: "DAVID WECHT"
Results 1 - 20
of 66
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
29 Dec 2023, 7:29 am
This grew out of Justice David Wecht’s comments in C.G. v. [read post]
14 Dec 2023, 9:05 pm
Justice Wecht and McIntyre noted that although the U.S. [read post]
12 Dec 2023, 5:00 am
Aug. 22, 2023 Wecht, J.), the Pennsylvania Supreme Court revisited precedents from over a half of a century that have imposed civil liability arising from the provision of alcohol to visibly intoxicated persons with respect to persons and taverns licensed to engage in the commercial sale of alcohol, as compared against those same precedents that have limited the liability of social hosts.In this Klar case, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, in a defense-friendly decision, affirmed the… [read post]
23 Aug 2023, 5:45 pm
Justice David N. [read post]
20 Jul 2023, 2:21 pm
Justice David Wecht on Unenumerated Rights. [read post]
20 Jul 2023, 8:55 am
From his opinion yesterday in Bert Co. v. [read post]
20 Jul 2023, 8:54 am
From Pennsylvania Supreme Court Justice David Wecht's concurrence yesterday in Bert Co. v. [read post]
13 Apr 2023, 5:00 am
In his dissenting opinion in Gallagher and again in his concurring opinion in Donovan, Pennsylvania’s “Great Dissenter,” Justice David N. [read post]
29 Dec 2021, 5:01 am
"] From Justice Christine Donohue's majority opinion (joined by Chief Justice Max Baer and Justices Thomas Saylor and David Wecht) in In the Interest of Y.W. [read post]
2 Jul 2021, 9:38 am
Castor’s inducement,” Justice David Wecht wrote for court majority, “Cosby gave up a fundamental constitutional right, was compelled to participate in a civil case after losing that right, testified against his own interests, weakened his position there and ultimately settled the case for a large sum of money, was tried twice in criminal court, was convicted, and has served several years in prison. [read post]
1 Apr 2021, 10:41 am
Justice David Wecht dissented; his dissent largely focused on statutory construction and on whether an earlier precedent should be overturned, but it also disagreed with the majority's application of the "justifiable expectation" test: The Majority's entire analysis hinges on the correctness of a single proposition: that the use of recording devices to monitor child care workers is "ubiquitous. [read post]
25 Mar 2021, 7:54 am
” See Op. at p. 3.The dissent, written by Justice David N. [read post]
Validity of Household Exclusion Upheld in Third Circuit Court of Appeals Decision (Non-Precedential)
22 Mar 2021, 5:00 am
See this LINK for some of those other household exclusion cases that chip away at the extent of the Gallagher decision and serve to limit the decision to its facts just as the Pennsylvania Supreme Court should have done under settled principles of standards of appellate review.For additional issues with the Majority's decision in Gallagher, look no further than Justice David N. [read post]
9 Mar 2021, 5:00 am
Justice David N. [read post]
26 Feb 2021, 7:40 am
Writing for the 4-3 majority, Justice David Wecht, based upon a professed review of the plain language of the statute, concluded the General Assembly’s addition of “or deceptive conduct” to the catch-all provision of the CPL dictated a lesser, more relaxed standard. [read post]
26 Feb 2021, 7:40 am
Writing for the 4-3 majority, Justice David Wecht, based upon a professed review of the plain language of the statute, concluded the General Assembly’s addition of “or deceptive conduct” to the catch-all provision of the CPL dictated a lesser, more relaxed standard. [read post]
9 Feb 2021, 12:00 am
Check, Justice David Wecht upheld the continuing validity of the sudden emergency doctrine by reaffirming that Pennsylvania law “recognizes that sometimes injurious accidents are not caused by carelessness, but because events conspire to create a situation so urgent and unexpected that the person alleged to be blameworthy had little or no practical opportunity to avert the harm. [read post]
10 Dec 2020, 9:05 pm
In a concurrence, Pennsylvania Supreme Court Justice David N. [read post]
29 Nov 2020, 5:47 pm
” In a scathing concurring statement, Justice David Wecht noted that neither this lawsuit nor the lawsuit filed by the campaign of President Donald Trump alleges that any mail-in ballots were fraudulently cast or counted, saying, “The absence of fraud allegation from this matter–not to mention actual evidence of fraud–alone is fatal to [their] claim. [read post]
28 Nov 2020, 3:50 pm
Justice David N. [read post]
