Legal Opinion · Dissent

Schickle v. McFarlin

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided October 12, 1995Published

1DissentHudock, Judge

Respectfully, I dissent. The majority correctly points out that “a reputed father is entitled to a jury trial on the issue of paternity if it is demanded within ten days of the support conference.” Majority Slip Op. at p. 4. Both Mother and McFarlin were notified of their right to demand a jury trial on the issue of paternity at the April 13, 1988 support conference. Neither party demanded a jury trial on or before April 23, 1988 — the date when the ten day period expired. Because McFarlin did not demand the jury trial within ten days from the date of the original support conference, I would…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Downs v. ScottSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1963
  2. Rodney v. WiseSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1985
  3. Cohen v. SykesSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1955
  4. Smith v. BeardSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1984

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

Powered by the Exa API