Fox Consulting v. Spartan Warehouse & Distrib., Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that court’s defective Rule 1925(b) order precluded a finding of waiver
• finding no waiver where docket failed to indicate that order to file Rule 1925(b) statement was served on appellant; collecting cases
• vacating order dismissing PCRA petition where Rule 907 notice of intent to dismiss was not entered on docket or served upon the petitioner as required by Pa.R.Crim. 114
• declining to apply waiver where record did not reflect that court served Rule 1925(b) order on appellant and order did not advise appellant that failure to comply would result in waiver
• vacating and remanding due to non-compliance with Turner/Finley requirements where counsel’s no-merit letter informed appellant that his right to proceed pro se or by new counsel took effect only if withdrawal was permitted by the PCRA court
• PCRA counsel failed to comply with technical requirements of Turner/Finley where “no merit” letter stated counsel “intends to provide” appellant with copy of “no merit” letter and “will advise” appellant of his right to proceed pro se or hire private counsel

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).