Commonwealth v. Tootle, B.
This text of Commonwealth v. Tootle, B. (Commonwealth v. Tootle, B.) 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.
Opinion
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA EASTERN DISTRICT
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, : No. 58 EM 2021 : Respondent : : : v. : : : BRIAN TOOTLE, : : Petitioner :
ORDER
PER CURIAM
AND NOW, this 4th day of January, 2022, the Petition for Leave to File Petition for
Allowance of Appeal Nunc Pro Tunc is DENIED.
With respect to the Application to Withdraw as Counsel filed by Attorney Todd M.
Mosser, Petitioner’s former counsel, it is noted that Petitioner’s present counsel had filed
an entry of appearance in this Court, confirming that his appearance substitutes for that
of Attorney Mosser. Attorney Mosser thus need not have filed an Application to Withdraw
as Counsel. See Pa.R.A.P. 120 (stating that, with respect to matters in which “an attorney
enters an appearance as substitute counsel for a party, the original counsel of record for
that party may withdraw by praecipe, without filing an application for permission to
withdraw”). Accordingly, the Prothonotary is DIRECTED to treat Attorney Mosser’s
Application to Withdraw as Counsel as a Praecipe to Withdraw as Counsel.
Justice Brobson did not participate in the consideration or decision of this matter.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Commonwealth v. Tootle, B., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/commonwealth-v-tootle-b-pa-2022.