Talbert, C. v. Phila. CCP
This text of Talbert, C. v. Phila. CCP (Talbert, C. v. Phila. CCP) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme 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 THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA EASTERN DISTRICT
CHARLES PRINCE EDWARD TALBERT, : No. 94 EM 2023 : Petitioner : : : v. : : : PHILADELPHIA COURT OF COMMON : PLEAS AND PHILADELPHIA DISTRICT : ATTORNEYS OFFICE, : : Respondents :
ORDER
PER CURIAM
AND NOW, this 25th day of March, 2024, the “Mandamus Action” is DISMISSED.
See Commonwealth v. Reid, 642 A.2d 453 (Pa. 1994) (explaining that hybrid
representation is impermissible). The Prothonotary is DIRECTED to forward the
“Mandamus Action” to counsel of record.
The “Petition for Supplemental Mandamus” is DENIED.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Talbert, C. v. Phila. CCP, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/talbert-c-v-phila-ccp-pa-2024.