otherwise untimely claim (Pennsylvania) · Go Syfert
← Pennsylvania issues

otherwise untimely claim in Pennsylvania

13 Pennsylvania opinions name it 3 courts 2009–2026 8 in the last five years

The cases below were cited by Pennsylvania courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.

Followed or applied (7)

CaseFollowedCited
Commonwealth v. DeLoachgreen
pacommwct · 1998 · cited in 5 Pennsylvania opinions naming this issue, 2009–2026
2 sentences

2026See Commonwealth v. DeLoach, 714 A.2d 483 , 486 n.8 (Pa. [Cmwlth.] 1998) (holding that issues not raised at trial cannot be raised in a 1925(b) statement); Rutledge v. Depart[ment] of Trans[portation], [] 508 A.2d 1306 , 1306–07 ([Pa. Cmwlth.] 1986) (same).

2026See Commonwealth v. DeLoach, 714 A.2d 483 , 486 n.8 (Pa. [Cmwlth.] 1998) (holding that issues not raised at trial cannot be raised in a [Rule] 1925(b) [S]tatement); Rutledge v. Dep[artment] of Trans[portation], . . . 508 A.2d 1306, 1306-07 ([Pa.] 1986) (same).

55
Rutledge v. Commonwealthgreen
pacommwct · 1986 · cited in 5 Pennsylvania opinions naming this issue, 2009–2026
2 sentences

2026See Commonwealth v. DeLoach, 714 A.2d 483 , 486 n.8 (Pa. [Cmwlth.] 1998) (holding that issues not raised at trial cannot be raised in a 1925(b) statement); Rutledge v. Depart[ment] of Trans[portation], [] 508 A.2d 1306 , 1306–07 ([Pa. Cmwlth.] 1986) (same).

2026See Commonwealth v. DeLoach, 714 A.2d 483 , 486 n.8 (Pa. [Cmwlth.] 1998) (holding that issues not raised at trial cannot be raised in a [Rule] 1925(b) [S]tatement); Rutledge v. Dep[artment] of Trans[portation], . . . 508 A.2d 1306, 1306-07 ([Pa.] 1986) (same).

25
Steiner v. Markelgreen
pa · 2009 · cited in 4 Pennsylvania opinions naming this issue, 2013–2026
2 sentences

2026We note a “Rule 1925(b) statement cannot resurrect an otherwise untimely claim.” Steiner v. Markel, 968 A.2d 1253 (Pa. 2009).

2024See Steiner v. Markel, 968 A.2d 1253, 1257 (Pa. 2009) (explaining that “a Rule 1925(b) statement cannot resurrect an otherwise untimely claim or objection.”).2 Ms. Huang’s issues dismissed as waived.

24
Commonwealth v. Eisenberg, M., Apltgreen
pa · 2014 · cited in 1 Pennsylvania opinions naming this issue, 2024–2024
1 sentence

2024See Commonwealth v. DeLoach, 714 A.2d 483 , 486 n.8 (Pa. 15 “Whether a fine is excessive under our Constitution is a question of law, therefore our standard of review is de novo and our scope of review is plenary.” Commonwealth v. Eisenberg, 98 A.3d 1268, 1279 (Pa. 2014). 13 C[mwlth.] 1998) (holding that issues not raised at trial cannot be raised in a 1925(b) statement); Rutledge v. Depart[ment] of Trans[portation], [ 508 A.2d 1306 , 1306- 07 (Pa. Cmwlth.] 1986) (same).

11
Coulter v. Ramsdengreen
pasuperct · 2014 · cited in 1 Pennsylvania opinions naming this issue, 2020–2020
1 sentence

2020“Hence, only claims properly presented in the lower court are preserved for appeal.” Coulter v. Ramsden, 94 A.3d 1080, 1089 (Pa. Super. 2014). [I]n general, a Rule 1925(b) statement cannot resurrect an otherwise untimely claim or objection.

11
Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. v. Ralichgreen
pasuperct · 2009 · cited in 1 Pennsylvania opinions naming this issue, 2017–2017
1 sentence

2017See Mortgage Electronic Registration System, Inc. v. Ralich, 982 A.2d 77, 80 (Pa. Super. 2009).

11
Commonwealth v. Millergreen
pasuperct · 2014 · cited in 1 Pennsylvania opinions naming this issue, 2016–2016
1 sentence

2016See Commonwealth v. Miller, 102 A.3d 988, 995 (Pa. Super. 2014).

11

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Pennsylvania. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (1)

CaseCitedYears
Wright v. City of Philadelphia green
paed · 2017
1 sentence

2026Further, any petition attempting to invoke one of the timeliness exceptions “shall be filed within one year of the date the claim could have been presented.” Id. § 9545(b)(2). 11 Appellant cited Wright v. City of Philadelphia, 229 F.Supp.3d 322 (E.D.

12026–2026

Where else courts name it

NY 16 (1990–2025) PA 13 (2009–2026) TN 6 (1997–2025) MS 5 (1992–2007) FL 4 (2020–2026) CA 3 (1988–2012) NM 2 (2010–2015)

Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check