Legal Opinion

Commonwealth v. Douris

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided January 16, 2001PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OLSZEWSKI, J.:

¶ 1 James Douris appeals his conviction for harassment. We affirm his conviction but reverse the award of attorney’s fees.

¶ 2 After a district justice convicted appellant of harassment, appellant appealed to the trial court. See Trial Court Opinion Pursuant to PA. Rule of Appellate Procedure 1925 (“Trial Court Opinion”), 3/29/00, at 1. Judge Ward F. Clark heard the matter de novo on November 23, 1999, and found appellant guilty. See id. Judge Clark found the following facts:

For three years, Marie Costello worked for the Department of Human Resources on the sixth floor of the…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. LordSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1998
  2. Thunberg v. StrauseSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1996
  3. Commonwealth v. McKenzieSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1990
  4. Warehime v. ARWCO Corp.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1996

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Douris v. SchweikerDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2002
  2. Com. v. Logan, A.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2014
  3. Com. v. Merceir, R.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2020
  4. Com. v. Miller, J.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2016

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API