Rieseck v. Lanahan
This text of 10 Pa. Super. 281 (Rieseck v. Lanahan) 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.
Opinion
In Yost v. Davison, 5 Pa. Superior Ct. 469, we held that an order allowing a transcript of appeal from the judgment of a justice of the peace to be filed nunc pro tunc is interlocutory, and from it an independent appeal does not lie. This conclusion was reached after a full consideration of the question and we see no reason for not adhering to it. See also Starr’s Estate, 3 Pa. Superior Ct. 212, Drum v. Uplinger, 9 Pa. Superior Ct. 404, and Powell v. Gayley, 9 Pa. Superior Ct. 405.
The appeal is quashed at the costs of the appellant, and the record is remitted with a procedendo.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
10 Pa. Super. 281, 1899 Pa. Super. LEXIS 272, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rieseck-v-lanahan-pasuperct-1899.