Legal Opinion · Dissent

In re Estate of Cherwinski

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided August 4, 2004Published

1DissentJoyce, J.

¶ 1 Upon my review, I cannot agree with the distinguished Majority’s conclusion that an order imposing a surcharge constitutes a final and appealable order when entered prior to the confirmation of the final accounting and schedule of distribution. Accordingly, I dissent.

¶ 2 In this Commonwealth, an appeal may only be taken from: “1) a final order or one certified by the trial court as final; 2) an interlocutory order as of right, 3) an interlocutory order by permission; or 4) a collateral order.” Morgan Trailer Mfg., Co. v. Hydraroll, Ltd., 804 A.2d 26, 29 (Pa.Super.2002). An order is not…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Pugar v. GrecoSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1978
  2. Tagnani v. LewSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1981
  3. In Re Estate of HarrisonSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2000
  4. In Re Estate of GenivivaSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1996
  5. Donsavage EstateSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1966

7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API