Hollis v. Nelson

692 A.2d 1081

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania·Decided April 22, 1997·No. Petition No. 495·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

AND NOW, this 22nd day of April, 1997, it is ORDERED that the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is GRANTED BUT LIMITED to the following:

Whether the Superior Court erred in affirming the trial court’s valuation of Petitioner’s pension as of the date of the separation hearing?

[1082]*1082It is further Ordered that Respondent’s Cross-Petition for Allowance of Appeal is DENIED.

NEWMAN, J., 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

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

AND NOW, this 22nd day of April, 1997, it is ORDERED that the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is GRANTED BUT LIMITED to the following:

Whether the Superior Court erred in affirming the trial court’s valuation of Petitioner’s pension as of the date of the separation hearing?

[1082]*1082It is further Ordered that Respondent’s Cross-Petition for Allowance of Appeal is DENIED.

NEWMAN, J., did not participate in the consideration or decision of this matter.

Hollis v. Nelson, 692 A.2d 1081 (Pa. 1997).

Pincite

692 A.2d 1081 (Hollis v. Nelson) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.