Legal Opinion

Commonwealth v. Gerstner

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided March 24, 1995PublishedCited by 16 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

MONTEMURO, Justice.

This appeal requires us to interpret the scope of the phrase “person responsible for the child’s welfare” within the context of 42 Pa.C.S. § 5554(3).1 If we agree with the Superior Court and conclude that appellant, Harold Gerstner, was a “person responsible for the child’s welfare,” then the statute of limitations is tolled and appellant will face trial on criminal charges. If we determine that appellant was not a “person responsible for the child’s welfare,” we must reinstate the trial court’s order dismissing the criminal charges. We hold that appellant can in…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Commonwealth ex rel. Morgan v. SmithSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1968
  2. Commonwealth v. CameronSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1962
  3. Pennsylvania State Education Ass'n v. Commonwealth, Department of Public WelfareCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1982
  4. Commonwealth v. PowersSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1990
  5. Commonwealth v. BethlehemSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1989

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

3Cited by16 opinions

  1. T.B. v. L.R.M.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2001
  2. T.B. v. L.R.M.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2001
  3. Peters v. CostelloSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2005
  4. Commonwealth v. KellamSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1998
  5. Peters v. CostelloSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2005

11 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