Friedman v. Kasser
This text of 438 A.2d 1001 (Friedman v. Kasser) 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.
Opinions
Because no final decree in equity was entered on the docket below we cannot reach the merits and, accordingly, quash this appeal. A lower court’s direction to enter a specified order, unaccompanied by actual entry of the specified order on the docket, is interlocutory and not appealable and must be reduced to judgment and docketed before an appeal can be taken. Pa.R.A.P. 301(c). See Coren v. DiDomenico, 291 Pa. Superior Ct. 331, 435 A.2d 1252 (1981). The order appealed from merely states that the decree nisi “shall be entered on praecipe.” No final decree was ever entered. [296]*296Consequently, we must quash this appeal. Murray v. Abcon, Inc., 291 Pa. Superior Ct. 428, 435 A.2d 1301 (1981); Mercadante v. Ranieli, 271 Pa. Superior Ct. 565, 414 A.2d 397 (1979).
Appeal quashed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
438 A.2d 1001, 293 Pa. Super. 294, 1981 Pa. Super. LEXIS 3918, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/friedman-v-kasser-pasuperct-1981.