Binder v. Miller

317 A.2d 304, 456 Pa. 11, 1974 Pa. LEXIS 496
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania·Decided March 25, 1974·No. Appeal, No. 279·Published·Cited by 11 cases

Opinion

Opinion

Per Curiam,

This action in equity was filed in the Civil Trial Division of the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia. The defendants filed preliminary objections to the complaint challenging the “jurisdiction” of the Civil Trial Division to entertain the action and asserting “exclusive jurisdiction” was in the Orphans’ Court Division. When these preliminary objections were overruled, the defendants filed this appeal under the provisions of the Act of March 5, 1925, P. L. 23, 12 P.S. § 672, as amended by the Act of July 31, 1970, P.L. 673, No. 223, Art. II, § 202, 17 P.S. § 211.202 (Supplement).

The issue presented is not one of jurisdiction. See Posner v. Sheridan, 451 Pa. 51, 299 A. 2d 309 (1973). Hence, the appeal is not cognizable under the Act of 1925, supra. The decree entered in the trial court is [13]*13interlocutory in nature from which the instant appeal does not lie.1

Appeal quashed. Each party to pay own costs.

Mr. Chief Justice Jones dissents.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Binder v. Miller, 317 A.2d 304, 456 Pa. 11, 1974 Pa. LEXIS 496 (Pa. 1974).

317 A.2d 304 (Binder v. Miller) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Commonwealth v. Johnson
645 A.2d 234 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1994)
Bartus v. Bartus
540 A.2d 576 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1988)
Otto v. Barziloski
44 Pa. D. & C.3d 144 (Lackawanna County Court of Common Pleas, 1986)
Hollman v. Hollman
500 A.2d 837 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1985)
Gorden v. Cutler
471 A.2d 449 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1983)
Balter v. Balter
425 A.2d 1138 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1981)
Sto-Rox Focus on Renewal Neighborhood Corp. v. King
398 A.2d 241 (Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania, 1979)