• Reid v. Temple Univ. Hosp.

    Publication Date: 2019-06-10
    Practice Area: Civil Procedure | Discovery
    Industry: Health Care | Legal Services
    Court: U.S. District Court for Pennsylvania - Eastern
    Judge: District Judge Bartle
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:

    Case Number: 19-0684

    Defendants moved for discovery sanctions for plaintiff's failure to timely provide requested discovery relating to his prostate condition that he certified was caused by the stress of his discriminatory termination and court found that plaintiff disregarded the court-ordered deadline and precluded plaintiff from asserting any claim of damages related to his prostate condition. Motion granted.

  • United States v. Taylor

    Publication Date: 2019-05-27
    Practice Area: Criminal Appeals
    Industry: Investments and Investment Advisory | Legal Services
    Court: U.S. District Court for Pennsylvania - Eastern
    Judge: District Judge Brody
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:

    Case Number: 19-0616

    Defendant filed a habeas corpus petition arguing ineffective assistance of trial and appellate counsel in her conviction for conspiracy to defraud the United States and corruptly endeavoring to obstruct and impede the due administration of the internal revenue laws and the court found the asserted conflict of interest on the part of trial counsel did not exist, the stipulation trial counsel signed was reasonable and the evidence would have come in through the testimony of an IRS agent and defendant failed to establish the Brady violat

  • Commonwealth v. Byrd

    Publication Date: 2019-05-20
    Practice Area: Civil Rights | Criminal Appeals
    Industry: Legal Services
    Court: Superior Court
    Judge: Judge Shogan
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:

    Case Number: 19-0581

    The commonwealth charged defendant with person not to possess a firearm. While the trial was proceeding, the court received an email message with a voice recording from Brandy Wilson, who was set to testify as a character witness for defendant. Wilson said she had been threatened by assistant district attorney Lawrence Sachs. After a hearing, the trial court declared a mistrial sua sponte based on manifest necessity due to prosecutorial misconduct. The trial court later dismissed the charge with prejudice. On appeal, the commonwealth

  • U.S. v. Greenspan

    Publication Date: 2019-05-13
    Practice Area: Criminal Law
    Industry: Health Care | Legal Services
    Court: U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
    Judge: Justice Bibas
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Peter Goldberger and Pamela A. Wilk
    for defendant: Craig Carpenito, United States Attorney, Mark E. Coyne, John F. Romano, and Steven G. Sanders (Office of United States Attorney)

    Case Number: 17-2458

    District Court Erred in Limiting Advice-of-Counsel Defense but Conviction Affirmed Due to Overwhelming Evidence of Criminal Intent

  • Dubose v. Willowcrest Nursing Home

    Publication Date: 2019-04-29
    Practice Area: Wrongful Death
    Industry: Health Care | Legal Services
    Court: Courts of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County
    Judge: Judge Carrafiello
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:

    Case Number: 19-0438

    The court did not err in granting a setoff, and it quashed this appeal because the attorney for one of the parties had a conflict of interest and was not entitled to file an appearance on her own behalf in this matter.

  • United States v. Greenspan

    Publication Date: 2019-04-29
    Practice Area: Criminal Law
    Industry: Health Care | Legal Services
    Court: U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
    Judge: Justice Bibas
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Peter Goldberger and Pamela A. Wilk
    for defendant: Craig Carpenito, United States Attorney, Mark E. Coyne, John F. Romano, and Steven G. Sanders (Office of United States Attorney)

    Case Number: 17-2458

    District Court Erred in Limiting Advice-of-Counsel Defense but Conviction Affirmed Due to Overwhelming Evidence of Criminal Intent

  • Commonwealth v. Kelsey

    Publication Date: 2019-04-08
    Practice Area: Criminal Law
    Industry: Legal Services
    Court: Superior Court
    Judge: Judge Colins
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:

    Case Number: 19-0390

    Dismissal of PCRA petition reversed where PCRA counsel filed an inadequate no-merit letter that failed to discuss all the issues raised by defendant in his pro se PCRA petition. Order of the PCRA court vacated, case remanded.

  • Johnson v. Schatz

    Publication Date: 2019-04-08
    Practice Area: Civil Procedure | Legal Malpractice
    Industry: Legal Services
    Court: Courts of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County
    Judge: Judge Massiah-Jackson
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:

    Case Number: 19-0334

    Plaintiff's legal malpractice action was barred by the statute of limitations, and the discovery rule did not apply. Even if the action had been timely, the court concluded plaintiff failed to demonstrate a causal connection between the attorneys' conduct and plaintiff's losses.

  • William J. Mansfield, Inc. v. Udren Law Offices, P.C.

    Publication Date: 2019-03-25
    Practice Area: Law Firm Client Relationships
    Industry: Legal Services
    Court: U.S. District Court for Pennsylvania - Eastern
    Judge: District Judge Pratter
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:

    Case Number: 19-0325

    Defendant's counsel moved to withdraw as counsel and the court denied the motion because counsel was still serving a meaningful purpose, withdrawal would result in prejudice and counsel should have been aware of the risk of nonpayment at the time it took the case. Motion denied.

  • Raynor v. D'Annunzio

    Publication Date: 2019-03-25
    Practice Area: Civil Procedure
    Industry: Legal Services
    Court: Superior Court
    Judge: Judge Elliott
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:

    Case Number: 19-0328

    Trial court erred in holding that appellees' civil contempt action was not a civil proceeding as contemplated by the Dragonetti act and that appellants did not have standing because a contempt proceeding did represent a "procurement, initiation, or continuation of civil proceedings" as contemplated by the Dragonetti act and appellants had standing. Affirmed in part and reversed in part.