Friday, June 24, 2005

Pa. Bulletin of June 25, 2005

here's the link
http://www.pabulletin.com/secure/data/vol35/35-26/index.html

of possible interest

-- DOT - adjucations - separation of adjuc. and adversary functions - IRRC comments
http://www.pabulletin.com/secure/data/vol35/35-26/1237.html

-- Health - integrated HIV planning council public meeting
http://www.pabulletin.com/secure/data/vol35/35-26/1237.html

-- welfare - nursing facility assessment program
http://www.pabulletin.com/secure/data/vol35/35-26/1230.html

-- Dept. of State - mtg. on implementation of Help America Vote Act
http://www.pabulletin.com/secure/data/vol35/35-26/1230.html


Donald Marritz, Attorney
MidPenn Legal Services
128 Breckenridge Street
Gettysburg, Pa. 17325

Wednesday, June 22, 2005

UC appeals - petition for review - specificity

Deal v. UCBR, Commonwealth Court, June 22, 2005
http://www.courts.state.pa.us/OpPosting/CWealth/out/32CD05_6-22-05.pdf

This is a disturbing and potentially problematic decision (3-judge panel), which held that the claimant/appellant's petition for review in Commonwealth Court was not sufficiently specific and did not satisfy the requirements of Appellate Rule1513(d).

The UC case involved willful misconduct. Ultimately, the UCBR denied the claim. Claimant's petition for review said that

-- the UCBR was guilty of an error of law in deciding to reverse the decision of the Referee and deny benefits

-- there is a lack of substantial evidence to support the decision of the UCBR that reverses the decision of the referee and denies benefits to the claimant.

The Court said that the statement of objections is a "notice pleading" which "must do more than simply restate" the court's scope of review, as it said the claimant's petition did.

The court noted that every subsidiary question is deemed to be included and that Rule 1513(d) says that a petition must contain only "a general statement of the objections to the order or other determination." Nonetheless the court said the the petition "must state its objections with 'sufficient specificity to permit the conversion of an appellate document to an original jurisdiction pleading and vice versa should such action be necessary to assure proper judicial disposition."

The court also noted that it had "declined to consider issues addressed in a claimant's brief but [which were] not [included] in his or her petition for review."

Ultimately, the court said the the petition "reveals no statement which fairly embraces the issue of willful misconduct and no statement identifying specific findings of fact that allegedly are unsupported by substantial evidence."

Rather than giving the claimant an opportunity to amend her petition for review, as a trial court might do in similar circumstances, the Commonwealth Court dismissed the case.

Donald Marritz
MidPenn Legal Services

Tuesday, June 21, 2005

Custody - Appeal - Standard of review

Hanson v. Hanson - Pa. Superior Court June 21, 2005
http://www.courts.state.pa.us/OpPosting/Superior/out/s30032_05.pdf

Held…

The issue in a custody case is not (as stated by appellant) whether the lower court reached the "right decision" or whether the appellee sustained his/her burden of proving that it was in the children's best interest for appellee to have custody.

Rather, the issue is whether, based on the evidence presented and giving due deference to the trial court's weight and drecibility determinations, the trial court erred or abused its discretion in determining what is in the children's best interests.

The court emphasized its "limited and deferent [sic?] scope and standard of review."

The appellate court recognized that the lower court faced a difficult decision. "In these circumstances, the court's custody decision is an 'imperfect and often painful' solution to the parties….'There is no black letter formula that easily resolve [custody] disputes…." The appellate court said that it "very likely would have found ample evidence to sustain the court's decision if it ruled in favor of [appellant].

However, the court stated that it would not re-weigh the evidence and found "ample evidence to support" the lower court's findings and decision.

Don Marritz, MidPenn Legal Services

Monday, June 20, 2005

Pa. Bulletin of June 18, 2005

Link: http://www.pabulletin.com/secure/data/vol35/35-25/index.html

Of possible interest:

Courts - orphans court - proposed rules - "e-forms"
http://www.pabulletin.com/secure/data/vol35/35-25/1170.html

Health - WIC - maximum allowable prices
http://www.pabulletin.com/secure/data/vol35/35-25/1184.html

Welfare - subsidized child care eligibility - new regulations
http://www.pabulletin.com/secure/data/vol35/35-25/1206.html

Human relations commission - public hearing opinion - sex discrimination case
http://www.pabulletin.com/secure/data/vol35/35-25/1193.html

Don Marritz, MidPenn Legal Services

Pa. Bulletin of June 11, 2005

Link: http://www.pabulletin.com/secure/data/vol35/35-24/index.html

Of possible interest:

Attorneys - discipline - rules - amendments
http://www.pabulletin.com/secure/data/vol35/35-24/1113.html

Courts - local rules - Juniata and Perry Counties
http://www.pabulletin.com/secure/data/vol35/35-24/1118.html

Evidences - rules - character evidence - criminal cases - Rule 404 - amendments
http://www.pabulletin.com/secure/data/vol35/35-24/1114.html

Don Marritz, MidPenn Legal Services

Thursday, June 16, 2005

Evidence - admissibility of instant messages

In the Interest of FP
Superior Court June 15, 2005

http://www.courts.state.pa.us/OpPosting/Superior/out/s10004_05.pdf

Held: Messages proper admitted under circumstances of the case.

Don Marritz, MidPenn Legal Services

UC case - willful misconduct - computers

Blicha v. UCBR - June 15, 2005
http://www.courts.state.pa.us/OpPosting/CWealth/out/1855CD04_6-15-05.pdf

Held: There was substantial evidence to find that claimant had downloaded pornography on his work computer, in violation of work rule, despite lack of witness to testify to visual sighting of the improper use. Over 150 pornographic images were found on the computer. Evidence showed that they were accessed during work hours using cl's computer with his log-in and password.

Don Marritz, MidPenn Legal Services

Tuesday, June 14, 2005

Commonwealth Court Holds Private School Student Eligible for Section 504 Services

Lower Merion School District v. Student Doe and Parents Doe
http://www.courts.state.pa.us/OpPosting/CWealth/out/1979CD04_6-14-05.pdf

For the first time, the Commonwealth Court has ruled that a private school student who is also enrolled in the public school district is entitled to receive occupational therapy services under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act and its Pennsylvania implementing regulations, despite the fact the student was not eligible for special education services under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act.

In so holding the Court found that the mandate in Section 504 and its federal implementing regulations clearly require that a public school district provide a free appropriate public education to each qualified student in its jurisdiction and that an appropriate education constitutes provision of regular or special education and related aids and services that are designed to meet the individual needs of handicapped persons.

In re: Private Criminal Complaint - Pa. Super. - June 6, 2005

This case discusses trial and appellate standards of review of DA decision not to accept a private criminal complaint.

http://www.courts.state.pa.us/OpPosting/Superior/out/e03002_04.pdf

Don Marritz
MidPenn Legal Services

UC case - Voluntary Quit - Sexual Harassment

Collier Stone Company v. UCBR - Cmwlth Court - June 7, 2005

http://www.courts.state.pa.us/OpPosting/CWealth/out/2587CD04_6-7-05.pdf

Court upheld Board finding of good cause to quit because of sexual harassment.

Don Marritz
MidPenn Legal Services

Monday, June 06, 2005

Custody - Grandparents v. Parent

Jordan v. Jackson - Pa. Superior Court
http://www.courts.state.pa.us/OpPosting/Superior/out/A03037_05.pdf

Court affirmed grant of primary custody to natural mother, despite her considerable recent problems.

Grandparents failed to overcome scales "tipped hard" in favor of natural mother.

Consumer Case - Implied Warranty of Mechantibility

Krack v. Action Motors, 867 A2d 86 (CT 2005)

Held -- dealer who sells used cars breaches implied warranty of merchantibility when it innocently sells car with salvage history, charging buyer price of non-salvaged car
fault is not an element of a case for breach of implied warranty of merchantibility…purpose of implied warranty is not to assign blame

Donald Marritz, MidPenn Legal Services

Pa. Bulletin of June 4, 2005

Here's the link
http://www.pabulletin.com/secure/data/vol35/35-23/index.html

Of possible interest--

Minor court rules - amendments - misc.
http://www.pabulletin.com/secure/data/vol35/35-23/1077.html

Support rules - amendments
http://www.pabulletin.com/secure/data/vol35/35-23/1075.html

Community services block grant - state plan - hearing
http://www.pabulletin.com/secure/data/vol35/35-23/1084.html

Weatherization - state plan - hearing
http://www.pabulletin.com/secure/data/vol35/35-23/1085.html

Welfare - pharmacy services
http://www.pabulletin.com/secure/data/vol35/35-23/1098.html


Donald Marritz, Attorney
MidPenn Legal Services

Pa. Bulletin of May 28, 2005

Here's the link
http://www.pabulletin.com/secure/data/vol35/35-22/index.html

Of possible interest:

1. Welfare -- LIHEAP plan and hearing schedule
http://www.pabulletin.com/secure/data/vol35/35-22/1054.html

2. Education - proposed state grant - Individuals w/Disabilities Eduction Act, part C
http://www.pabulletin.com/secure/data/vol35/35-22/1055.html

3. Notaries - fees
http://www.pabulletin.com/secure/data/vol35/35-22/1045.html

4. Housing - 2006 low-income housing tax credit program- public hearing
http://www.pabulletin.com/secure/data/vol35/35-22/1060.html

5. IRRC - DPW subsidized child care regs approved
http://www.pabulletin.com/secure/data/vol35/35-22/1061.html

6. Professional license suspensions for non-payment of support
barber-
http://www.pabulletin.com/secure/data/vol35/35-22/1068.html
motor vehicle salesman-
http://www.pabulletin.com/secure/data/vol35/35-22/1070.html


Donald Marritz, Attorney
MidPenn Legal Services