Walker Investments, Inc. v. Roberts

How courts have described this case

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

• finding that appellant could not rely upon a misprint in an unofficial version of the statutes to render his appeal timely
• noting error in Purdon's publication of section 8(c) of P.L. 1379 of 1931
• noting error in Purdon’s publication of section 8(c) of P.L. 1379 of 1931
• attorney’s reliance on erroneous statement of appeal timeframe in 8 legal publisher’s unofficial compendium of Pennsylvania’s uncodified statutes did not present an extraordinary event that would allow nunc pro tunc appeal
• explaining difference between codified and uncodified statutes

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).