Rieseck v. Lanahan

Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Rieseck v. Lanahan, 10 Pa. Super. 281 (1899)
1899 Pa. Super. LEXIS 272
Beaver, Beeber, Orlady, Porter, Rice, Smith

Rieseck v. Lanahan

Opinion of the Court

Per Curiam,

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.

Reference

Full Case Name
G. and J. Rieseck, Agents v. J. K. Lanahan
Cited By
1 case
Status
Published
Syllabus
Appeal — Justice of peace — Interlocutory order allowing transcript. 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. Yost v. Davison, 5 Pa. Superior Ct. 469, followed.