Commonwealth v. Jones

242 A.2d 471, 212 Pa. Super. 173, 1968 Pa. Super. LEXIS 1087
Superior Court of Pennsylvania·Decided March 21, 1968·No. Appeals, Nos. 251 to 258·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Opinion

Per Curiam,

In the instant case, our Court granted leave to file this appeal nunc pro tunc. It appears, however, that post-trial motions have not been filed in accordance with the requirements set forth in Commonwealth v. Grillo, 208 Pa. Superior Ct. 444, 222 A. 2d 427 (1966). Accordingly, this case is remanded to the lower court to allow appellant to file post-trial motions nunc pro tunc. Should the said post-trial motions be dismissed, appellant shall have the right to appeal nunc pro tunc.

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

Commonwealth v. Jones, 242 A.2d 471, 212 Pa. Super. 173, 1968 Pa. Super. LEXIS 1087 (Pa. Ct. App. 1968).

242 A.2d 471 (Commonwealth v. Jones) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Scace v. Hartford Hospital, No. 532378 (Dec. 15, 1995)
1995 Conn. Super. Ct. 14224 (Connecticut Superior Court, 1995)