The Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court reversed an Unemployment Compensation Board of Review order that had affirmed a referee’s determination. The referee found that the claimant failed to prove that he had necessitous and compelling cause to quit his job. Initially, the Commonwealth Court dealt with a COVID-related fiasco: the employer failed to appear at the initial … Read more
In the case of In re Sale of Real Est. by Lackawanna Co. Tax Claim Bureau, Ms. Brown appealed the order that denied a Petition to Set Aside Judicial Tax Sale of her property. The Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court reversed. The Court held the Bureau did not comply with its obligations under Section 607.1(a) of the … Read more
In Bashinsky v. Unemployment Comp. Bd. of Rev., Claimant sought review of an adjudication of the Unemployment Compensation Board of Review (Board), which affirmed the Referee’s decision to dismiss Claimant’s appeal as untimely under Section 501(e) of the Unemployment Compensation Law, 43 P.S. § 821(e). The Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court reversed. The issue was whether the … Read more
The Appellate Division ruled in McNellis-Wallace v. Hoffman that a malpractice attorney could not sustain a claim against successor attorneys for contribution and indemnification where the original attorney negligently failed to serve proper 90-day notice against a public employee under the state’s Tort’s Claim Act.
More than one month after a defense verdict in a non-jury trial, the plaintiff filed a motion for leave to file a post-trial motion nunc pro tunc. The trial court denied the motion, claiming that the plaintiff did not show he was diligent in filing the motion. The Superior Court reversed after finding that the prothonotary … Read more
Plaintiff-appellant was a lawyer representing himself in an action to recover unpaid legal fees. Seemingly not content with simply proving true the old adage about a lawyer representing himself, the lawyer was also curt and disrespectful, as well as foolish. He alleged in his complaint that he gave the proper 30-day notice required under Rule … Read more
The mortgagee filed a foreclosure suit against the mortgagor, but a nonsuit was granted after the lower court found that the mortgagee failed to give proper notice under Act 91. The mortgagee then issued proper notice and filed a nearly-identical foreclosure suit. The trial court held that the action was barred by res judicata. The … Read more