In re Y.W.-B.

In In re Y.W.-B., the Superior Court confronted two challenging family law questions. First, the Court held that a county child protective services agency “may obtain a court order compelling a parent’s cooperation with a home visit upon a showing of a fair probability that a child is in need of services, and that evidence … Read more

In re Estate of Jabbour

In re Estate of Jabbour was a suit between a deceased man’s wife and daughter. The Superior Court held that the orphans’ court did not abuse its discretion when it allowed the man’s wife to revoke her spousal election. The record supported the court’s finding that the wife did not have full knowledge of the … Read more

In re Adoption of B.G.S.

The Superior Court confronted an Anders brief while reviewing In re Adoption of B.G.S. There, a couple broke up, and, a short time later, the woman learned she was pregnant. She never told the father and put the child up for adoption. After the child was adopted, the mother told the father about his child’s existence. The … Read more

Khalil v. Cole

In Khalil v. Cole, the PA Superior Court held that shifting the names of an underlying legal doctrine from lis pendens to res judicata in Preliminary Objections was proper, that the operative facts and issues raised by the plaintiff in another lawsuit still pending before the Superior Court on appeal are the same, and that the trial … Read more

Gustafson v. Springfiled

In Gustafson v. Springfield, while he with a gun, one juvenile shot and killed his young friend. The deceased boy’s parents sued the gun manufacturer and alleged that, under the common law of Pennsylvania, the gun-industry defendants were negligent and strictly liable for manufacturing and/or selling a defectively-designed handgun that caused their son’s death. The PA Superior … Read more

Commonwealth v. Smith

In Commonwealth v. Smith, the PA Superior Court held that the defendant’s petition to remove himself from sex offender registration was not an untimely PCRA petition. Relying on Commonwealth v. Lacombe, the Court held that the lower court was obligated to review the merits of the claim.

Commonwealth v. Brown

The defendant in Commonwealth v. Brown argued that the trial court erred when it imposed a sentence above the mandatory minimum for DUI, 75 Pa.C.S.A. § 3802(a)(2), an ungraded misdemeanor and his first such offense in ten years. The PA Superior Court affirmed the sentence, holding that the trial court acted within its discretion when … Read more

Commonwealth v. McLaughlin

In Commonwealth v. McLaughlin, the PA Superior Court affirmed the dismissal of the defendant’s writ of coram nobis. The Court held: 1. the defendant’s claim of judicial bias was cognizable under the PCRA and cannot serve as the basis for coram nobis relief; 2. the defendant could not obtain PCRA relief on his judicial bias … Read more

Commonwealth v. Shires

In Commonwealth v. Shires, the PA Superior Court discussed the distinction and significance of conditions of probation and/or parole imposed by the sentencing court, and conditions of supervision, which can be imposed by the probation and/or parole department. Here, the conditions of supervision that the defendant allegedly violated were never ordered by the court nor … Read more

Commonwealth v. Williams

In Commonwealth v. Williams, the Superior Court held that, where counsel has effectively discontinued working on a defendant’s behalf, a pro se filing does not offend considerations of hybrid representation. In the instant case, the trial court should have considered post-sentence letters directly from the defendant as timely post-sentence motions.