Garwood v. Ameriprise Fin.

In Garwood v. Ameriprise Fin., the Superior Court held that the Garwoods waived their claims on appeal. Four of the claims were waived because they were not included in the 1925(b) Statement. The Court ruled that the Garwoods engaged in “appellate gamesmanship” by swapping their weight of the evidence issue, which they alleged in the … Read more

Commonwealth v. Wilson

In Commonwealth v. Wilson, the Superior Court vacated the defendant’s conviction, holding that the trial court erred in its denial of a motion for suppression because the officer did not possess reasonable suspicion for the vehicle stop.

Commonwealth v. Risoldi

In Commonwealth v. Risoldi, the Superior Court vacated the defendant’s conviction for theft by deception, ruling the evidence was insufficient to sustain the verdict. The Court also affirmed the denial of a 600A motion and gave a useful, detailed analysis. 

In re N.S.

In re N.S. was a family law case in which the Superior Court determined that the evidence was insufficient to transfer custody of a dependent child from the mother. The evidence did not support the trial court’s ruling that it was “clearly necessary” to remove the child.

Burns v. Cooper

The Superior Court held that Cooper’s statement to an insurance representative–“[Burns] was a liar who could not be trusted”–was sufficient to establish actual damages in a defamation action.

Diaz v. Nabiyev

The Superior Court affirmed the trial court’s grant of a PFA, holding that the evidence was sufficient to sustain the trial court’s conclusion by a preponderance of the evidence that Nabiyev knowingly engaged in a course of conduct towards Diaz that placed her in reasonable fear of bodily injury.

Commonwealth v. Steele

In Commonwealth v. Steele, the Superior Court ruled that using a police scanner to avoid the police after shooting someone is not sufficient to establish criminal use of a communication facility. But, more notably, this case is worth reading because the defendant’s claim of self-defense is comedic gold.

Commonwealth v. Nellom

A jury convicted the defendant of theft of services. The Superior Court affirmed, finding the evidence was sufficient to sustain the verdict. However, the Court held that Nellom’s sentence was illegal. The trial court sentenced Nellom pursuant to a third-degree felony in violation of Apprendi v. New Jersey, because the only question presented for a … Read more

In re D.P.

The trial court adjudicated D.P. delinquent for indecent assault of a person less than thirteen years old stemming from an incident between D.P., who was fifteen years old, and his nine-year-old cousin. On appeal, D.P. argued the evidence was insufficient to show he engaged in a course of conduct of indecent assault. The Superior Court … Read more