Calloway, E. v. Rudenstein, D.
169 A.3d 558
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania·Decided May 31, 2017·No. Calloway, E. v. Rudenstein, D. - No. 49 EM 2017·Published
Opinion
ORDER
AND NOW, this 31st day of May, 2017, the Application for Leave to File Original Process and the Petition for Writ of Mandamus and/or Extraordinary Relief are DISMISSED. See Commonwealth v. Ali, 10 A.3d 282, 293 (Pa. 2010) (explaining that hybrid representation is not permissible). The Prothonotary is DIRECTED to forward the filings to counsel of record.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Calloway, E. v. Rudenstein, D., 169 A.3d 558 (Pa. 2017).
169 A.3d 558 (Calloway, E. v. Rudenstein, D.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Commonwealth v. Ali
10 A.3d 282 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 2010)