Legal Opinion · Dissent

Commonwealth v. Douglas

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided October 28, 2003Published

1Dissent

DISSENTING OPINION BY

KLEIN, J.:

¶ 1 I respectfully dissent from the majority’s opinion deeming all issues waived for Appellant’s failure to file a 1925(b) statement with the lower court.

¶ 2 In this case, it is clear that the trial judge received Douglas’ 1925(b) statement and discussed the issues in his opinion. Moreover, I do not believe that Common*746wealth v. Butler, 571 Pa. 441, 812 A.2d 631 (2002), Bryant v. Glazier Supermarkets Inc., 823 A.2d 154 (Pa.Super.2003), and Everett Cash Mutual Ins. Co. v. T.H.E. Ins. Co., 804 A.2d 31 (Pa.Super.2002), are dispositive of this case. The cases are not…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. LordSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1998
  2. Commonwealth v. ButlerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2002
  3. Commonwealth v. OrtizSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2000
  4. Everett Cash Mutual Insurance v. T.H.E. InsuranceSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2002
  5. Bryant v. Glazier Supermarkets, Inc.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2003

1 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