Howard, M. v. Ct. Com. Pleas Phila. County

164 A.3d 474, 2016 WL 7422632, 2016 Pa. LEXIS 2896
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania·Decided December 22, 2016·No. 151 EM 2016·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 22nd day of December, 2016, the Application for Leave to File Original Process and the Petition for Writ of Mandamus are DISMISSED. See Commonwealth v. AIL 10 A,3d 282 (Pa. 2010) (explaining that hybrid representation is not permitted).

The Prothonotary is DIRECTED to forward the filings to counsel of record and to strike the name of the jurist from the caption.

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

Howard, M. v. Ct. Com. Pleas Phila. County, 164 A.3d 474, 2016 WL 7422632, 2016 Pa. LEXIS 2896 (Pa. 2016).

164 A.3d 474 (Howard, M. v. Ct. Com. Pleas Phila. County) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Commonwealth v. Ali
10 A.3d 282 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 2010)