Shows
The Standard of ReviewAllegheny Reproductive Health Center v. Department of Human ServicesSend us a textHost Corrie Woods interviews attorney, professor, and Executive Director of the Women's Law Project Susan Frietsche to discuss Allegheny Reproductive Health Center v. Department of Human Services, which, among many constitutional holdings, overruled an earlier determination that a ban on abortion funding for Medicaid recipients did not violate Pennsylvania constitutional rights and set the stage for a recognition of reproductive rights as fundamental rights under the Commonwealth's charter. Show Notes:You can find Justice Christine Donohue's excellent, 219-page majority opinion, Justice David Wecht's 71-page concurring opinion, and all of the ot...2025-06-181h 22The Standard of ReviewCommonwealth v. BradleySend us a textHost Corrie Woods interviews fellow appellate attorney Michael Wiseman of Wiseman & Schwartz to discuss Commonwealth v. Bradley, holding that petitioners pursuant to the Post Conviction Relief Act may assert claims of ineffective assistance of post-conviction counsel at the earliest available opportunity, including on direct appeal. Show Notes:Justice Todd's Majority OpinionJustice Dougherty's Concurring OpinionJustice Wecht's Concurring OpinionJustice Mundy's Dissenting OpinionShinn v. Ramirez summaryMartinez v. Ryan Opinion AnalysisRead more about Bradley and all of SCOPA's cases on SCOPAblog.2022-10-1331 minThe Standard of ReviewIn Re: Amazon.com, Inc., Fulfillment Center Fair Labor Standards Act and Wage and Hour LitigationSend us a textHost Corrie Woods interviews fellow appellate attorney Pete Winebrake of Winebrake & Santillo to discuss In Re: Amazon.com, Inc., Fulfillment Center Fair Labor Standards Act and Wage and Hour Litigation (In Re: Amazon) in which SCOPA held that an employee's time spent on an employer's premises awaiting mandatory security screening constitutes time "worked" for purposes of Pennsylvania's Minimum Wage Act, and that the maxim de minimum non curat lex, or, the law does not care for trivialities, does not apply to time worked for purposes of that Act. 2021-11-1552 minThe Standard of ReviewCommonwealth v. ShawSend us a textHost Corrie Woods interviews fellow appellate attorney Teri B. Himebaugh to discuss Commonwealth v. Shaw, in which SCOPA held that petitioners pursuant to the PCRA may assert claims of ineffective assistance of their appellate counsel for the first time on appeal.Show Notes:Chief Justice Saylor's OpinionJustice Mundy's Dissenting OpinionThe Police Transparency ProjectPart 2 of The Philadelphia Inquirer's special report series, Losing ConvictionSiphonaptera poemRead more about Commonwealth v. Shaw and all of SCOPA's cases on SCOPAblog.2021-10-1025 minThe Standard of ReviewPittsburgh Logistics Sys., Inc. v. Beemac Trucking, LLCSend us a textHost Corrie Woods interviews fellow appellate attorneys Dan McLane and Tom Sanchez of Eckert Seamans to discuss Pittsburgh Logistics Sys., Inc. v. Beemac Trucking, LLC, a case in which the Court held unanimously that the Restatement test for no-hire/no-poach provisions ancillary to a services contract between two business entities governs in Pennsylvania and finding the subject no-hire/no-poach provision to be unenforceable. Show Notes:Justice Mundy's OpinionUnited States Department of Justice's "No-Poach Approach"Bloomberg Law SummaryRead more about Pittsburgh Logistics Sys., Inc. v. Beemac Tr...2021-09-1320 minThe Standard of ReviewWise v. Huntingdon Cnty. Housing Dev. Corp.Send us a textHost Corrie Woods interviews fellow appellate attorney Nathan Murawsky of Hamburg, Rubin, Mullin, Maxwell & Lupin, PC to discuss Wise v. Huntingdon Cnty. Housing Dev. Corp., a case involving statutory sovereign immunity, and an exception thereto for injuries resulting from dangerous conditions of the Commonwealth's real estate. In Wise, the Court at long last reassesses and rejects some of the more bizarre distinctions in this area of the law. Show Notes:Chief Justice Baer's OpinionJustice Donohue's Concurring OpinionJustice Wecht's Concurring OpinionRead more about Wise v...2021-08-1643 minThe Standard of ReviewCommonwealth v. AlexanderSend us a textHost Corrie Woods interviews fellow appellate attorney Aaron Marcus of the Defender Association of Philadelphia to discuss Commonwealth v. Alexander, in which SCOPA held that the Pennsylvania Constitution provides motorists greater privacy rights than the federal Constitution, requiring any search of an automobile in Pennsylvania be supported not only by probable cause, as the federal Constitution requires, but also by exigent circumstances that make it impracticable to obtain a warrant. Show Notes:Justice Donohue's OpinionJustice Baer's Concurring OpinionChief Justice Saylor's Dissenting OpinionJustice Dougherty's Dissenting OpinionJustice Mundy's Dissenting Opinion"P...2021-07-2654 minThe Standard of ReviewCommonwealth v. PeckSend us a textHost Corrie Woods interviews fellow appellate attorney Brian McNeil of the York County Office of the Public Defender to discuss his victory in Commonwealth v. Peck, where he doggedly appealed to SCOPA despite the lower courts' swift dismissal of his close reading of PA's Drug Delivery Resulting in Death statute (DDRD). Fortunately, SCOPA agreed with his arguments, thus saving his client 20-40 years from life behind bars. Show Notes:Justice Donohue's OpinionJustice Wecht's Concurring OpinionArticle from the York Daily RecordArticle: Pennsylvania Uses the Charge of "Drug...2021-06-0928 min