Pennsylvania Consolidated Statutes

20 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 3353 (2026)

 Order of court.

✓ current as of May 2026
Coverage note: this corpus holds the consolidated Pa.C.S. titles only. Unconsolidated P.S. statutes (UTPCPL 73 P.S. § 201-1, Liquor Code, wage payment laws) are not included; a miss here does not mean the statute does not exist. Check palegis.us.
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section PA-LEGpalegis.us JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

§ 3353.  Order of court.

When the personal representative is not authorized to do so by this title or is denied the power to do so by the governing instrument, if any, or when it is advisable that a sale have the effect of a judicial sale, he may sell any real or personal property of the estate, including property specifically devised, at public or private sale, or may pledge, mortgage, lease, or exchange any such property, or grant an option for the sale, lease, or exchange of any such property, under order of the orphans' court division of the county where letters testamentary or of administration were granted, upon such terms and upon such security and after such notice as the court shall direct, whenever the court shall find such sale, pledge, mortgage, lease, exchange, or option to be desirable for the proper administration and distribution of the estate.

(Dec. 10, 1974, P.L.867, No.293, eff. imd.)

 

Cross References.  Section 3353 is referred to in sections 3357, 7792, 7794 of this title; section 8152 of Title 42 (Judiciary and Judicial Procedure).

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 11 cases, 1980–2019 · leading case: Est. of Anna Marie Leipold, Appeal of: Hines, S., 208 A.3d 507 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2019).
Est. of Anna Marie Leipold, Appeal of: Hines, S., 208 A.3d 507 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2019). · cites it 6× “Pursuant to 20 Pa.C.S. § 3353, 2 the executrix filed a petition for leave of court to sell the mortgaged real property.”
In Re Est. of Dobson, 417 A.2d 138 (Pa. 1980). “Appellants argued the exceptions before a three judge panel of the orphans court division.”
In Re Est. of Hughes, 538 A.2d 470 (Pa. 1988). “§ 3356 (purchase by the personal representative himself); and 20 Pa.C.S. § 3353 (when the Code or the governing instrument forbid such a sale, or when the sale is to have the effect of a judicial sale).”
Maier v. Henning, 548 A.2d 1266 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1988). · cites it 2× “We begin our analysis by eliminating any consideration of a judicial sale under Section 3353 of the Code, 20 Pa.C.S. § 3353. The petition contains no averment that it is advisable that the sale have the effect of a judicial sale.”
In Re the Est. of Habazin, 679 A.2d 1293 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1996). “, on November 7, 1994, issued an order approving the sale of the property at $144,000 pursuant to 20 Pa.C.S. § 3353, which provides for the sale of property by a personal representative “when it is advisable that a sale have the effect of a judicial sale.”
Est. of Cary H. Simpson, Appeal of: Simpson, J. (Pa. Super. Ct. 2019). “20 Pa.C.S. § 3353. Thus, while Decedent’s intent as outlined in the will must be complied with to the extent possible, compliance with all provisions herein was not possible due to the shortfall in Estate assets.”
In Re: Est. of Krasinski, S. Apl of: Dunzik (Pa. 2019). “20 Pa.C.S. § 3353. [J-25A-2019 and J-25B-2019] - 11 require that the order “shall constitute a final order upon a determination of finality by the Orphans' Court Division.”
In Re: Est. of Krasinski, S. Apl of: Dunzik (Pa. 2019). “20 Pa.C.S. § 3353. [J-25A-2019 and J-25B-2019] - 11 require that the order “shall constitute a final order upon a determination of finality by the Orphans' Court Division.”
In re Est. of Miller, 48 Pa. D. & C.5th 188 (2015). “Respondent also argues that the provision in the PEF Code which forms the basis for Petitioner’s request for a judicial sale under these circumstances, 20 Pa. C.S. §3353, is unavailing. According to Ms.”
In re Est. of Hewitt, 688 A.2d 1185 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1996). “Although I will assume for the purposes of this discussion that the sale of the apartment was proper, I strongly disagree with the assumption that the sale was authorized by statute as well as the ultimate conclusion that Mrs. Colwell is entitled to share in the proceeds from…”
Will v. Killmer, 39 Pa. D. & C.3d 627 (1986). “§5521, 20 Pa.C.S. §3353, and Pa. Orphans’ Court Rules 14.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.