Hall Approved Free Access to American Case Law
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 2016

Manson v. Schulman

Manson v. Schulman
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Decided March 7, 2016 · Consideration, Eakin, Matter
133 A.3d 290; 635 Pa. 192; 2016 Pa. LEXIS 391; 2016 WL 868857 (Atlantic Reporter, Third Series)

Manson v. Schulman

Opinion of the Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

AND NOW, this 7th day of March, 2016, the Application for Leave to File Original Process and the Petition for Writ of Mandamus and/or Extraordinary Relief are DISMISSED. See Commonwealth v. Ali, 608 Pa. 71, 10 A.3d 282, 293 (2010) (explaining that a pro se filing presented by an appellant represented by counsel is a “legal nullity").

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

Justice EAKIN did not participate in the consideration or decision of this matter.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.

↑