Skip to main content

Commonwealth v. Howard

Citations

  • 788 A.2d 351
  • 567 Pa. 481
  • 2002 Pa. LEXIS 106

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • stating “[w]e do not see how a proper court order can, in any fashion, be perceived as governmental interference”
  • stating “[w]e do not see how a proper court order [denying a request for additional funds to hire a private investigator] can, in any fashion, be perceived as governmental interference”
  • rejecting governmental interference claim regarding refusal to grant request of funds to hire an expert regarding his mental health; “[w]e do not see how a proper court order can, in any fashion, be perceived as governmental interference”
  • “We do not see how a proper court order can, in any fashion, be perceived as governmental interference.”
  • “We do not see how a proper court order can, in any fashion, be perceived as governmental interference.”
  • “We do not see how a proper court order can, in any fashion, be perceived as governmental interference.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Zappala, Cappy, Castille, Nigro, Newman, Saylor, Eakin

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

10 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

7 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.