Lippman v. Parker

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that this Court is precluded from reviewing the merits of the claim when the Commonwealth objects to the omission of a Pa.R.A.P. 2119(f) Statement
• holding that this Court is precluded from reviewing the merits of the claim when the Commonwealth objects to the omission of a Pa.R.A.P. 2119(f) Statement
• holding that an appellate court is precluded from conducting appellate review if the Commonwealth objects to the omission of a Rule 2119(f) statement
• holding that, if the Commonwealth objects to a Rule 2119(f) omission, this Court is precluded from reviewing the merits of the claim and the appeal must be denied
• holding that, where the appellee objects to a Rule 2119(f) omission, “this Court is -3- J-S46008-16 precluded from reviewing the merits of the claim and the appeal must be denied”
• holding that when the Commonwealth objects to the omission of a Rule 2119(f) statement, this Court is precluded from reviewing the merits of the claim and the appeal must be denied

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).