• In the Interest of N.B.

    Publication Date: 2021-08-16
    Practice Area: Family Law
    Industry: State and Local Government
    Court: Superior Court
    Judge: Judge Nichols
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:

    Case Number: 21-0921

    Bucks County Children and Youth Social Services appealed a dependency review order requiring it to pay for the costs of a Soberlink alcohol monitoring device for child's father and court found order was appealable but CYS waived its issues by failing to object before the trial court. Affirmed.

  • C.L. v. M.P.

    Publication Date: 2021-06-07
    Practice Area: Family Law
    Industry:
    Court: Superior Court
    Judge: Judge Nichols
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:

    Case Number: 21-0638

    Participation in custody proceedings did not constitute parent's waiver of confidentiality protections under the Mental Health Procedures Act, as courts could use less intrusive means to evaluate a parent's mental health. Orders of the trial court affirmed in part and reversed in part, case remanded.

  • Mazzie v. Lehigh Valley Hosp.

    Publication Date: 2021-05-03
    Practice Area: Medical Malpractice
    Industry: Health Care
    Court: Superior Court
    Judge: Judge Nichols
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:

    Case Number: 21-0484

    Trial court did not abuse its discretion in granting appellee a new trial limited to damages in her medical malpractice action because liability was fairly determined, it was not intertwined with damages and a new trial limited to damages was appropriate because appellee endured compensable pain and suffering. Affirmed.

  • Ashdale v. Guidi Homes, Inc.

    Publication Date: 2021-03-15
    Practice Area: Civil Appeals
    Industry: Construction
    Court: Superior Court
    Judge: Judge Nichols
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:

    Case Number: 21-0266

    The appellate court lacked jurisdiction to review a trial court order on appeal under the collateral order doctrine because the challenged order involved a question of fact regarding application of the statute of repose that was not separable from plaintiffs' main cause of action. The superior court granted an application to quash defendants' appeal.

  • Commonwealth v. Moose

    Publication Date: 2021-01-18
    Practice Area: Criminal Appeals
    Industry:
    Court: Superior Court
    Judge: Judge Nichols
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:

    Case Number: 21-0033

    The trial court properly found that defendant could challenge the application of Pennsylvania's sexual offender registration statute, or SORNA II, outside the framework of the Post-Conviction Relief Act, though defendant was entitled to a hearing on whether his negotiated guilty plea precluded application of the scheme and its possible alteration of his agreed-upon sentence. The superior court vacated and remanded.

  • Law Journal Press | Digital Book

    District of Columbia Legal Malpractice Law 2024

    Authors: Shari L. Klevens, Alanna G. Clair

    View this Book

    View more book results for the query "*"

  • In the Interest of: D.G.

    Publication Date: 2020-11-30
    Practice Area: Family Law
    Industry:
    Court: Superior Court
    Judge: Judge Nichols
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:

    Case Number: 20-1294

    Trial court erred in involuntarily terminating parental rights and ordering permanency goal change to adoption for 15-year-old child where child's legal counsel failed to offer any advocacy beyond placing child's preferences on the record and where the record did not clearly demonstrate child's statutorily-required consent to adoption. Order of the trial court vacated, case remanded.

  • Sampathkumar v. Chase Home Fin., LLC

    Publication Date: 2020-11-02
    Practice Area: Real Estate
    Industry: Financial Services and Banking
    Court: Superior Court
    Judge: Judge Nichols
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:

    Case Number: 20-1196

    Trial court properly granted partial summary judgment in appellants' action alleging trespass, conversion and conspiracy, defendants moved to quash appellants' appeals and court upheld trial court's pretrial rulings, agreed the statute of limitations barred the trespass claims, conspiracy claims failed as a matter of law and quashed the appeals. Judgment affirmed, appeals quashed in part.

  • In the Interest of Y.W.-B.

    Publication Date: 2020-10-19
    Practice Area: Family Law
    Industry: State and Local Government
    Court: Superior Court
    Judge: Judge Nichols
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:

    Case Number: 20-1139

    Trial court properly found probable cause to compel parents' cooperation in a Department of Human Services home visit and did not apply an improper probable cause standard in ordering parents' compliance since there was a fair probability that children could have been in need of services and evidence relating to that need could have been found inside the home but did err in ordering mother not to record DHS employees acting in their official capacities. Affirmed in part and reversed in part.

  • Guiser v. Sieber

    Publication Date: 2020-08-17
    Practice Area: Real Estate
    Industry:
    Court: Superior Court
    Judge: Judge Nichols
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:

    Case Number: 20-0886

    Trial court erred in ordering injunctive relief under a theory of easement by prescription where trial court failed to resolve whether road over which the alleged easement ran was a private road, or a public road that would require the joining of municipalities as indispensable parties. Appeal quashed in part; vacated and remanded in part.

  • Commonwealth v. LeClair

    Publication Date: 2020-08-10
    Practice Area: Criminal Appeals
    Industry:
    Court: Superior Court
    Judge: Judge Nichols
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:

    Case Number: 20-0849

    The trial court erred in ordering defendant, who murdered his wife, disposed of her body in a lake and told the U.S. Coast Guard that she had fallen overboard, to pay restitution to the Coast Guard because the Coast Guard did not qualify as a "victim" under 18 Pa.C.S. §1106(a). The superior court vacated the restitution portion of defendant's judgment of sentence.