Commonwealth v. Jaynes

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Commonwealth v. Jaynes

292 A.2d 495, 221 Pa. Super. 302, 1972 Pa. Super. LEXIS 1519

CourtSuperior Court of Pennsylvania

DecidedJune 15, 1972

DocketAppeal, No. 534

StatusPublished

This text of 292 A.2d 495 (Commonwealth v. Jaynes) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Superior Court of Pennsylvania primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Commonwealth v. Jaynes, 292 A.2d 495, 221 Pa. Super. 302, 1972 Pa. Super. LEXIS 1519 (Pa. Ct. App. 1972).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam,

A new support hearing, stenographically reported, is necessary because the court below in violation of the Act of May 1, 1907, P. L. 135, §2, as amended, 17 P.S. §1802, had refused the request of counsel for the defendant-appellant that the testimony of the hearing be transcribed. Commonwealth ex rel. Hollinger v. Shaeffer, 196 Pa. Superior Ct. 301, 175 A. 2d 114 (1961). Remanded for a new hearing.

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

Opinion

Per Curiam,

A new support hearing, stenographically reported, is necessary because the court below in violation of the Act of May 1, 1907, P. L. 135, §2, as amended, 17 P.S. §1802, had refused the request of counsel for the defendant-appellant that the testimony of the hearing be transcribed. Commonwealth ex rel. Hollinger v. Shaeffer, 196 Pa. Superior Ct. 301, 175 A. 2d 114 (1961). Remanded for a new hearing.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

292 A.2d 495, 221 Pa. Super. 302, 1972 Pa. Super. LEXIS 1519, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/commonwealth-v-jaynes-pasuperct-1972.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack