Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 3/25/2004

Radakovich v. Radakovich

Citations

846 A.2d 709
2004 Pa. Super. 82
2004 Pa. Super. LEXIS 307

How courts have described this case

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

holding that an order entered in a non-final divorce action that awarded the parties’ son an interest in a brokerage account was appealable as a collateral order
stating that “[p]ursuant to the doctrine of res judicata, a final judgment on the merits by a court of competent jurisdiction will bar any future suit between the parties or their privies in connection with the cause of action.”
where a divorce decree has not been entered and ancillary claims remain unresolved, issues such as those seeking special relief are interlocutory and unappealable
“[A]ny rights [appellant] may have as to the account will be irreparably lost if review is postponed until a final divorce decree is entered since [s]on could dissipate the funds in their entirety.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Cavanaugh, Melvin, Stevens

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

12 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

11 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

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.