Home/Supreme Court of Pennsylvania/Calloway, E. v. Rudenstein, D.

Calloway, E. v. Rudenstein, D.

169 A.3d 558
CourtSupreme Court of Pennsylvania
DecidedMay 31, 2017
DocketCalloway, E. v. Rudenstein, D. - No. 49 EM 2017
StatusPublished

This text of 169 A.3d 558 (Calloway, E. v. Rudenstein, D.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Pennsylvania primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Calloway, E. v. Rudenstein, D., 169 A.3d 558 (Pa. 2017).

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM

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

Related

Commonwealth v. Ali
10 A.3d 282 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 2010)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
169 A.3d 558, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/calloway-e-v-rudenstein-d-pa-2017.