Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 1/31/1996
Smathers v. Smathers
Citations
- 670 A.2d 1159
- 448 Pa. Super. 162
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- recognizing that the Court cannot act as a pro se litigant’s attorney and develop the argument
- reiterating that this Court may construe a pro se litigant’s material liberally but will not act as his attorney
- noting that “this court is willing to liberally construe materials filed by a pro se litigant,” but warning that an “appellant is not entitled to any particular advantage because she lacks legal training”
- stating noncompliance with Rule 2116 is particularly grievous because statement of questions involved defines specific issues for review
- stating noncompliance with Rule 2116 concerning statement of questions involved is particularly grievous because statement of questions involved defines specific issues for review
- stating noncompliance with Rule 2116 is particularly grievous because statement of questions involved defines specific issues for review
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Sole, Popovich, Olszewski
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
12 cases in this archive cite this case.
- Butler v. IllesSuperior Court of Pennsylvania· 2000-02-28· cited 105×
- Hrinkevich v. HrinkevichSuperior Court of Pennsylvania· 1996-04-11· cited 67×
- Denton v. Silver Stream Nursing & Rehabilitation CenterSuperior Court of Pennsylvania· 1999-10-07· cited 42×
- Smitley v. Holiday Rambler Corp.Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 1998-01-27· cited 36×
- G.D. v. D.D.Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 2013-02-15· cited 25×
- Moses Taylor Hospital v. WhiteSuperior Court of Pennsylvania· 2002-05-09· cited 21×
- Commonwealth v. WhiteSuperior Court of Pennsylvania· 1996-03-20· cited 15×
- Bronson v. KERESTESSuperior Court of Pennsylvania· 2012-03-21· cited 12×
- Commonwealth v. SisnerosSuperior Court of Pennsylvania· 1997-04-18· cited 10×
- Fielding v. FieldingSuperior Court of Pennsylvania· 1996-11-12· cited 6×
- Robertson v. Confederated Tribes of Grand RondeGrand Ronde Court of Appeals· 2004-07-12· cited 1×
- Denton v. SILVER STREAM NUR. & REHAB. CTR.Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 1999-10-07
Cites
3 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.