tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-121803982026-01-27T09:38:02.057-05:00PLAN Legal UpdateLegal news and information from the Pennsylvania Legal Aid Network.Henry Leonehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05093720535051625652noreply@blogger.comBlogger1666125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12180398.post-47095984826054687612025-02-05T12:49:00.001-05:002025-02-05T12:49:03.530-05:00congrats - breach - damagesEriccson Properties v. Bulle ConstructionPa. Superior Court 1-10-25https://www.pacourts.us/assets/opinions/Superior/out/J-A14031-23m%20-%20106233392294097123.pdf?cb=1A breach of contract entitles the non-breaching party to damages. “The central principle of the law regarding contractual damages is that the non-breaching party should be placed in the position he or she would have been Donald Marritzhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09888454540385625656noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12180398.post-20716797124621731182025-02-05T12:47:00.007-05:002025-02-05T12:47:54.813-05:00default judgment - strike v. open - timelinessSchwaielder et al. v. Quigley - Pal Superior - 1-9-25https://www.pacourts.us/assets/opinions/Superior/out/J-A24022-24m%20-%20106231825293901777.pdf?cb=1Petition to strike default judgment “[As] a petition to strike a default judgment presents us with questionsof law regarding the operation of the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure,‘our standard of review is de novo and our scope of reviewDonald Marritzhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09888454540385625656noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12180398.post-16949630359381260872025-02-05T12:02:00.003-05:002025-02-05T12:02:49.202-05:00tax sale - proof of notice - business record - hearsayMolchan v. Mercer County Tax Claim Bureau (TCB)319 A. 3d 363 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2024)https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=9826829080865870124&q=molchan+v.+tax+claim&hl=en&as_sdt=4,39Held: Field report of agent of TCB was hearsay and not admissible as a business record, where- property owner testified that he did not see/receive proper notice of tax sale- owner testified that heDonald Marritzhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09888454540385625656noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12180398.post-68496298249038462532025-02-05T11:59:00.003-05:002025-02-05T11:59:45.774-05:00admin. law - due process - untimely/late decisionJ.F. v. DHS - Cmwlth. Court - 10-1-24 - reported casehttps://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=9871961392109473603&q=no.+728+C.D.+2023&hl=en&as_sdt=4,39Held: There was no due process violation by adjudication that was months past the statutory deadline or 45 days in 23 Ps. S.S. 6341(c.3). The requirement of a prompt decision was held to be directory rather than mandatory.Of Donald Marritzhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09888454540385625656noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12180398.post-40233966820942068922025-02-05T11:58:00.003-05:002025-02-05T11:58:45.263-05:00FLSA - home health care service - travel between client homesSecretary of Labor v.Nursing Home Care Management, Inc.3d Cir. - January 31, 2025https://www2.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/232284p.pdfHeld: Employees of home health care service were entitled to be compensated for the time spent traveling between client homes, under the Fair Labor Standards Act,, 29 USC sec. 203 et seq.Donald Marritzhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09888454540385625656noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12180398.post-53186474722236774602025-02-05T11:57:00.003-05:002025-02-05T11:57:29.528-05:00tas sale - RETSL - due process - notice - agent/authorized personWeaver v. Schuylkill County Tax Claim Bureau - 9-11-24 - reported decisionhttps://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=13598406275712569404&q=weaver+v.+schuylkill&hl=en&as_sdt=4,39Held: Certified mailed notice of sale, signed for by agent of owner, complied with Real Estate Tax Sale Law, 72 P.S. sec. 5860.101 et seq. Owner or "authorized person" must get notice of Donald Marritzhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09888454540385625656noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12180398.post-65761913834327000412024-10-24T15:09:00.000-04:002024-10-24T15:09:06.430-04:00Pa Constitution - right to reputationIn re 30th County Investigating Grand Jury – Pa. Supreme Court – 10-24-24https://www.pacourts.us/courts/supreme-court/court-opinions/ Individuals’ “inherent and indefeasible” right to their reputation is enshrined in the Pennsylvania Constitution. PA CONST. art 1, § 1 (“All men are born equally free and independent, and have certain inherent and indefeasible rights, among which are Donald Marritzhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09888454540385625656noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12180398.post-69045106704997615482024-10-19T11:59:00.003-04:002024-10-19T11:59:52.121-04:00Housing - sec. 8 - lying about income - theft by deception Commonwealth v. Gaspard – Pa. Super. – 9-17-24 – reported, precedentialhttps://www.pacourts.us/assets/opinions/Superior/out/J-A12023-24o%20-%20106074904281363762.pdf?cb=1 Tenant convicted of theft by deception for lying about her income and thus receiving sec. 8 benefits. The record confirms that Appellant intentionally withheld reporting a source of income to the Authority despite her Donald Marritzhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09888454540385625656noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12180398.post-44219962770878278422024-09-16T17:11:00.001-04:002024-09-16T17:11:19.868-04:00contracts - breach - fraud - gist of action doctrineKotarja v. Aberra – Pa.Superior – 4-16-24 – non-precedential ***https://www.pacourts.us/assets/opinions/Superior/out/J-A03021-23m%20-%20106072503281132164.pdf?cb=1 Breach of contractThree elements are necessary to plead properly a cause of action for breach of contract: (1) the existence of a contract, including its essential terms, (2) a breach of a duty imposed by the contract and (3Donald Marritzhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09888454540385625656noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12180398.post-49438526663079923272024-08-29T17:09:00.006-04:002024-08-29T17:09:50.274-04:00MDJ judgments - certiorari - timely filing of proof of service of appellee and MDJThinkgrow Partners v. Parks – Pa. Super. – 8-26-24 – non-precedential ***https://www.pacourts.us/assets/opinions/Superior/out/J-A09043-24m%20-%20106049081278758898.pdf?cb=1 Appellant filed writ of certiorari from MDJ decision giving appellee, property owner and judgment for possession in alleged landlord-tenant case. Appellant claimed that he was not a tenant but rather a purchases Donald Marritzhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09888454540385625656noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12180398.post-13638920492339638132024-08-28T12:02:00.005-04:002024-08-28T12:02:52.366-04:00mailbox rule Angels of Care v. DHS – Cmwlth. Court – 8-28-24 – reported, precedentialhttps://www.pacourts.us/assets/opinions/Commonwealth/out/390CD23_8-28-24.pdf?cb=1 Pursuant to what has commonly been termed the “mailbox rule,” where there is evidence that an agency mailed a notice to a provider’s last known address that is not returned as undeliverable, that evidence ordinarily will be sufficientDonald Marritzhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09888454540385625656noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12180398.post-31184279840805902532024-08-15T10:16:00.003-04:002024-08-15T10:16:52.178-04:00evidence - authentication - screen shots of texts and emailsWalker v. Walker – Pa. Superior – 8-9-24 – reported, precedentialhttps://www.pacourts.us/assets/opinions/Superior/out/J-A09010-24o%20-%20106031657276969196.pdf?cb=1 In PFA contempt proceeding, court held that victim’s testimony sufficiently authenticated screen shots of defendant’s texts and emails, which supported a finding of contempt, citing Pa. R. E. 901 (b)(11)(B). Donald Marritzhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09888454540385625656noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12180398.post-87045886207479114032024-08-14T18:32:00.003-04:002024-08-14T18:32:39.289-04:00default judgment - opening - citing meritorious preliminary objectionLin v. Bernard – Pa. Super. – 8-12-24 – non-precedential*** https://www.pacourts.us/assets/opinions/Superior/out/J-A07028-23m%20-%20106033356277194969.pdf?cb=1 Pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. 237.3, a court “must grant a petition to open a default judgment where the petitioner attaches one or more preliminary objections.” In this contract case, the plaintiff didn’t plead whether the Donald Marritzhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09888454540385625656noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12180398.post-50897085138483447582024-08-14T13:17:00.000-04:002024-08-14T13:17:05.238-04:00Home Improvement Consumer Protection Act - oral notice of cancellation is effectiveCommonwealth v. Gillece Services - Cmwlth. Court - 7-3-24 - reported casehttps://www.pacourts.us/assets/opinions/Commonwealth/out/861CD23(2)_7-3-24.pdf?cb=1 In a case of first impression, the court held that a home improvement contractor must honor an oral cancellation request from a customer. The written notice requirement under the UTP/Consumer Protection Law, 73 P.S.Donald Marritzhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09888454540385625656noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12180398.post-57121929649589778512024-07-19T11:09:00.002-04:002024-07-19T11:09:28.494-04:00courts - appeals - cross-appeals - amended rulesRules https://www.pacourts.us/assets/opinions/Supreme/out/Attachment%20-%20106007790274421112.pdf?cb=1 Adoption report https://www.pacourts.us/assets/opinions/Supreme/out/Report%20-%Donald Marritzhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09888454540385625656noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12180398.post-9610605243088239292024-05-14T14:52:00.003-04:002024-05-14T14:52:59.136-04:00civil procedure - delay - dismissal - actual prejudiceOsborne v. Boscov’s Inc. – Pa. Super. – 5.14.24 – unreported***https://www.pacourts.us/assets/opinions/Superior/out/J-S03017-24m%20-%20105935293265951864.pdf?cb=1 Held: Trial court erred in dismissing a complaint, sua sponte, for lack of activity, without holding a hearing to determine if the defendant had suffered prejudice by the delay. It is well settled that a court may Donald Marritzhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09888454540385625656noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12180398.post-63371762563311375512024-05-07T12:21:00.000-04:002024-05-07T12:21:05.251-04:00admin. law - regulationsMarcellus Shale Coalition v. DEP – 292 A. 3d 921 (Pa. 2023) Held: The General Assembly intended to give DEP the authority to promulgate regulations about unconventional gas wells. From the opinion: The enabling statute “included the grant of authority by the General Assembly to the Agencies to promulgate” the regulations at issue. "Commonwealth agencies have noDonald Marritzhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09888454540385625656noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12180398.post-45256706516773933512024-04-03T16:05:00.004-04:002024-04-03T16:05:48.209-04:00UC - willful misconduct - COVID policy (2-1 decision)Rivera v. UCBR – 2-20-24 – Cmwlth. Court – reported decision (2-1 decision)https://www.pacourts.us/assets/opinions/Commonwealth/out/1487CD22_2-20-24.pdf?cb=1 Majority:Claimant did not have good cause for violating an employer policy, which required employees to get vaccinated or self-test weekly, absent medical grounds or a sincerely-held religious belief regarding vaccination and testing. Donald Marritzhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09888454540385625656noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12180398.post-36076119942248321032024-04-03T15:48:00.000-04:002024-04-03T15:48:05.488-04:00UC - willful misconduct - violation of federally-mandated COVID policyBowen v. UCBR – Cmwlth. Court – 1-9-24 – reported decisionhttps://www.pacourts.us/assets/opinions/Commonwealth/out/1103CD22_3-4-24.pdf?cb=2 Held: Claimant guilty of willful misconduct for failing to comply with ER’s reasonable vaccine policy – following federal mandate for federal contractors -- which required vaccination or medical or religious exemption. ClaimantDonald Marritzhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09888454540385625656noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12180398.post-28616658121274286472024-04-02T11:17:00.004-04:002024-04-02T11:17:40.862-04:00LT - L's damages - abandonment v. eviction1700 Market Street Associates v. Common Grounds Pa.Super. - 4-1-24 - reported https://www.pacourts.us/assets/opinions/Superior/out/J-A28029-23o%20-%20105884863260982536.pdf?cb=1 L cannot recover both rent and possessionThis Court, almost 100 years ago, declared that a landlord cannot evict a tenant and then recover both the possession of the property and the rent for the balance ofDonald Marritzhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09888454540385625656noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12180398.post-60910661372616471762024-04-02T11:15:00.003-04:002024-04-02T11:15:57.532-04:00Judgments - opening v. strikingWoods at Namanns Homeowners Assn. v. Cavuto - Cmwlth Court 4-1-24 – unreported *** https://www.pacourts.us/assets/opinions/Commonwealth/out/947CD22_4-1-24.pdf?cb=1There are several categories of judgments, including consent, default, and confession. Such judgments, in turn, may be challenged by filing a single petition to open or strike the judgment. See, e.g., Donald Marritzhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09888454540385625656noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12180398.post-22066027877590674792024-03-24T13:06:00.003-04:002024-03-24T13:06:58.835-04:00admin. law - mailbox rule - proof of mailing requiredMixell v. Board of Assessment Appeals – Cmwlth. Court – 3-20-24 – reported, precedentialhttps://www.pacourts.us/assets/opinions/Commonwealth/out/1243CD22_3-20-24.pdf?cb=1 HELD: Trial court erred in dismissing appeal of landowner/taxpayer seeking special tax status under Clear and Green Act, when owner failed to attend scheduled hearing, about which owner claimed she had never Donald Marritzhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09888454540385625656noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12180398.post-68755832867844933512024-03-11T11:02:00.001-04:002024-03-11T11:02:50.370-04:00admin. law - continuance - due processHite v. City of McKeesport – Pa. Cmwlth. – 3-8-24 – reported opinionhttps://www.pacourts.us/assets/opinions/Commonwealth/out/180CD23_3-11-24.pdf?cb=1 Held: Claimant for disability pension was denied due process when his request for a continuance to subpoena an examining physician was denied. From the opinion: The basic elements of procedural due process are “adequate Donald Marritzhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09888454540385625656noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12180398.post-38950867506455160882024-02-10T14:26:00.005-05:002024-02-10T14:26:48.047-05:00procedural due process - right to pre-deprivation hearing - legislative act doctrine not applicableWashington v. Pa. Department of Corrections – Pa. Supreme Court – December 19, 2023 Majority https://www.pacourts.us/assets/opinions/Supreme/out/J-32-2023mo%20-%20105773995249529739.pdf?cb=1 Concurring https://www.pacourts.us/assets/opinions/Supreme/out/J-32-2023co%20-%20105773995249530389.pdf?cb=1 Dissenting https://www.pacourts.us/assets/opinions/Supreme/out/Donald Marritzhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09888454540385625656noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12180398.post-74218128908173202182024-01-25T11:46:00.005-05:002024-01-25T11:46:47.880-05:00real property - tax sale - RETSL - waiver of personal services of notice of saleJohnson v. Greene County Tax Claim Bureau – Cmwlth. Court – 1-16-24 – not reported**https://www.pacourts.us/assets/opinions/Commonwealth/out/266CD22_1-16-24.pdf?cb=1 Held: Tax sale was proper under Real Estate Tax Sale Law (RETSL), 72 P.S> sec. 5860.101 et seq., sinceTCB complied with notice provisions of RETSLTCB established good cause for waiver of personal service requirement GoodDonald Marritzhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09888454540385625656noreply@blogger.com