Satiro, F. v. Maninno, A.

How courts have described this case

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

• finding that the appellant waived his appellate issues where he raised 29 issues in his concise statement
• “Pa.R.A.P. 1925(b) is not satisfied by simply filing any statement. Rather, the statement must … permit the trial court to understand the specific issues being raised on appeal.
• “In a Per Curiam Order. . . this Court directed Appellant to praecipe the trial court prothonotary to enter judgment on the decision of the trial court to avoid quashal of his appeal.”
• “Our law makes it clear that Pa.R.A.P. 1925(b) is not satisfied by simply filing any statement. Rather, the statement must … permit the trial court to understand the specific issues being raised on appeal.” (citation omitted)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Other cases named Satiro, F. v. Maninno, A.

1 other CourtListener record shares this case name.

• Satiro, F. v. Maninno, A.
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 2020-08-07· cited 2×