Legal Opinion

DeWald v. Pauline

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided April 15, 1983No. 1556PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Per curiam

We here review an appeal brought by a putative father in a paternity action from an order which denied a petition filed by appellant raising the defense that the applicable statute of limitations had expired. We do not reach the merits of this contention since we decide that the instant appeal must be quashed.

Despite the fact that neither of the parties have raised the issue of whether the order is appealable, we are compelled to address this issue sua sponte. Epstein v. State Farm Insurance Co., 308 Pa.Super. 33, 453 A.2d 1054 (1982); Napet, Inc. v. John Benkart & Sons Co., 288 Pa.Super.…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Bellotti v. SpaederSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1969
  2. Williams v. WilliamsSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1978
  3. Jackson v. MoultrieSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1981
  4. Cassidy v. Keystone InsuranceSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1982
  5. Napet, Inc. v. John Benkart & Sons Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1981

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Sanders v. SandersSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1989
  2. Sanderbeck v. SanderbeckSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1984

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

Powered by the Exa API