Dipple v. Pittsburgh
95 A.2d 925, 373 Pa. 307, 1953 Pa. LEXIS 305
Opinion
Opinion
The appeal in this case was not taken within three calendar months, as prescribed by statute, after the *308 order of the court below was entered. Therefore, lacking jurisdiction, we are obliged to quash the appeal of our own motion, which we do the less reluctantly because of the satisfactory disposition by Judge Marshall, speaking for the court en banc, of the questions submitted to the court in the case stated.
Appeal quashed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Dipple v. Pittsburgh, 95 A.2d 925, 373 Pa. 307, 1953 Pa. LEXIS 305 (Pa. 1953).
95 A.2d 925 (Dipple v. Pittsburgh) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Robinson v. Pa. Bd. of Prob. & Parole
582 A.2d 857 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1990)
Sixth Liberty, Inc. Tax Assessment Case
235 A.2d 801 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1967)
Commonwealth v. Yorktowne Paper Mills, Inc.
214 A.2d 203 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1965)
Kennedy v. Banbury Equipment Corp.
195 A.2d 832 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1963)
Department of Highways v. Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission
149 A.2d 552 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1959)