In Re SW (2001)
green
· 20 citation events
across 3 courts.
Showing the 10 strongest citers on record
(one row per citing case, strongest signal kept).
Treatment trajectory · 2001 → 2026 · click a year to view the case as of then
200120132026
Sort:
By significance ·
Most recent
green
In the Interest of: M.L. Appeal of: I.Q. (2026)
In re S.W., 781 A.2d 1247, 1249 (Pa. Super. 2001).
green
In Re: Adoption of: S.L.B., Appeal of: S.B. (2015)
This Court has stated that in a termination of parental rights case, “[a]ny determination as to ineffectiveness of counsel must be made expeditiously in the context of the original appeal, as a collateral attack by post-decree petition and/or appeal, after normal appeals have been exhausted, is not permissible.” In re S.W., 781 A.2d 1247, 1249 (Pa. Super. 2001) (quoting In re T.M.F., 573 A.2d 1035, 1043 (Pa. Super. 1990) (en banc)).
quoting In re T.M.F., 573 A.2d 1035, 1043 (Pa. Super. 1990) (en banc)
green
In the Interest of K.A.T. (2013)
In the Interest of S.W., 781 A.2d 1247, 1249 (Pa.Super.2001) (In a termination of parental rights case, “[a]ny determination as to ineffectiveness of counsel must be raised expeditiously in the context of the original appeal, as a collateral attack by post-decree petition and/or appeal, after normal appeals have been exhausted is not pennissible.”).
green
In Re BS (2003)
In the Interest of S.W., 781 A.2d 1247, 1249 (Pa.Super.2001) (In a termination of parental rights case, "[a]ny determination as to ineffectiveness of counsel must be raised expeditiously in the context of the original appeal, as a collateral attack by post decree petition and/or appeal, after normal appeals have been exhausted is not permissible."). ¶ 9 We turn now to appellant's ineffectiveness claim.
green
In re B.S. (2003)
In the Interest of S.W., 781 A.2d 1247, 1249 (Pa.Super.2001) (In a termination of parental rights case, “[a]ny determination as to ineffectiveness of counsel must be raised expeditiously in the context of the original appeal, as a collateral attack by post decree petition and/or appeal, after normal appeals have been exhausted is not permissible.”). ¶ 9 We turn now to appellant’s ineffectiveness claim.
green
In the Interest of: J.R.M., a Minor (2017)
In Re: Adoption of T.M.F., 573 A.2d 1035 (Pa. Super. 1990) (en banc); see also In the Interest of S.W., 781 A.2d 1247 (Pa. Super. 2001).
green
In The Interest of: K.K.T., a minor (2015)
In re Adoption of T.M.F., 392 Pa. Super. 598 , 573 A.2d 1035 (Pa. Super. 1990) (en banc); see also, In the Interest of S.W., 2001 Pa. Super 228, 781 A.2d 1247 (Pa. Super. 2001).
green
In Re Jt (2009)
In re Adoption of T.M.F., 392 Pa.Super. 598 , 573 A.2d 1035 (1990) ( en banc) ; see also, In the Interest of S.W., 781 A.2d 1247 (Pa.Super.2001).
green
In the Interest of J.T. (2009)
In re Adoption of T.M.F., 392 Pa.Super. 598 , 573 A.2d 1035 (1990) (en banc); see also, In the Interest of S.W., 781 A.2d 1247 (Pa.Super.2001).
green
In the Int. of: C.C.J., Appeal of: A.D.-N. (2020)
In re Adoption of T.M.F., 392 Pa.Super. 598 , 573 A.2d 1035 (1990) (en banc); see also, In the Interest of S.W., 781 A.2d 1247 (Pa.Super. 2001).