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.
§ 102. Definitions.
(a) General rule.--Subject to additional definitions contained in subsequent provisions of this title
which are applicable to specific provisions of this title, the following words and
phrases when used in this title shall have the meanings given to them in this subsection
unless the context clearly indicates otherwise:
"Clerk of court" or "clerk." The personnel of the office of the prothonotary or clerk of the division of the court
having jurisdiction over the matter.
"Court." The court or magisterial district judge having jurisdiction over the matter under
Title 42 (relating to judiciary and judicial procedure) exercised as provided in Title
42 or as otherwise provided or prescribed by law.
(b) Title 42 definitions.--Subject to additional definitions contained in subsequent provisions of this title
which are applicable to specific provisions of this title, words and phrases not defined
in subsection (a) which are defined in 42 Pa.C.S. § 102 (relating to definitions)
when used in this title shall have the meanings given to them in Title 42 unless the
context clearly indicates otherwise.
(Nov. 30, 2004, P.L.1618, No.207, eff. 60 days)
2004 Amendment. Act 207 amended the def. of "court" in subsec. (a). See section 29 of Act 207 in the
appendix to this title for special provisions relating to construction of law.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
12
cases, 1985–2013 · leading case:
Milne v. Milne, 556 A.2d 854 (Pa. 1989).
Milne v. Milne, 556 A.2d 854 (Pa. 1989).
· cites it 2× “* * * * * * 23 Pa.C.S. § 102(a)(1, 2), (3). As a result, the dissolution of a marriage is permitted without consideration of the events or conduct which may have led to the discord and the divorce, and the focus during the division of assets is the fact that the parties were…”
Beasley v. Beasley, 518 A.2d 545 (Pa. 1986).
· cites it 2× “]" 23 Pa.C.S. § 102(a)(6). While ordinarily this means that alimony should be based upon actual earnings, that is true only because ordinarily actual earnings accurately measure "ability to pay.”
McCoy v. McCoy, 888 A.2d 906 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2005).
“Husband also argues that the trial court’s rebanee on Sinha is inapposite in that Sinha dealt with a unilateral divorce that required a three year period of living separate and apart under 23 Pa.C.S. § 102(a)(2). Despite the differences between Sinha and the instant case, the…”
Pacella v. Pacella, 492 A.2d 707 (Pa. 1985).
· cites it 2× “]” 23 Pa.C.S. § 102(a)(6). While ordinarily this means that alimony should be based upon actual earnings, that is true only because ordinarily actual earnings accurately measure “ability to pay.”
Goldstein v. Goldstein, 512 A.2d 644 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1986).
· cites it 2× “(Emphasis added) Section 401(c) was structured to “effectuate the purposes” of the Divorce Code, and these purposes are found in 23 Pa.C.S. § 102. Specifically relevant for our purposes are §§ 102(a)(6) and 102(b).”
Commonwealth, Dep't of Health v. Hanes, 78 A.3d 676 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2013).
“While Section 1303 merely refers to the "court,” Section 102 of the Domestic Relations Code, 23 Pa.C.S. § 102, defines "court,” in pertinent part, as "[t]he court .”
Kehrer v. Nationwide Ins., 25 Pa. D. & C.4th 1 (1995).
· cites it 2× “§102 and 23 Pa.C.S. §102. It is because of the legislature’s ambiguous treatment of the term “court” that we may not rely with confidence on defendant’s argument that “court,” as it is used in section 8371, refers exclusively to a judge.”
Moritz v. Moritz, 33 Pa. D. & C.3d 521 (1985).
“See 23 Pa.C.S. § 102(b). . See 23 Pa.C.S. §401(d).”
McCullough v. McCullough, 41 Pa. D. & C.3d 115 (1985).
“23 Pa.C.S. § 102(a)(6). The evidence produced here does no more than show that respondent, on several occasions, has visited the home of Mr.”
Bishins v. Bishins, 42 Pa. D. & C.3d 460 (1985).
“” 23 Pa.C.S. §102(6). The Florida decree purports to effectuate economic justice between the Bishins.”
Newborn v. Newborn, 44 Pa. D. & C.3d 52 (1987).
“”23 Pa.C.S. §102(6). We are mindful that the parties to the instant dispute have not had the benefit previously of the standard for exercising discretion we adopt herein.”
Goodman v. Goodman, 49 Pa. D. & C.3d 515 (1988).
“63, 23 Pa. C.S. §102. In Gordon , the court analyzed an application to proceed under the new Divorce Code of 1980, 2 rather than the Divorce Law.”
— 23 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 102(6) — 2 cases
Bishins v. Bishins, 42 Pa. D. & C.3d 460 (1985).
“” 23 Pa.C.S. §102(6). The Florida decree purports to effectuate economic justice between the Bishins.”
Newborn v. Newborn, 44 Pa. D. & C.3d 52 (1987).
“”23 Pa.C.S. §102(6). We are mindful that the parties to the instant dispute have not had the benefit previously of the standard for exercising discretion we adopt herein.”
— 23 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 102(a) — 2 cases
Milne v. Milne, 556 A.2d 854 (Pa. 1989).
“* * * * * * 23 Pa.C.S. § 102(a)(1, 2), (3). As a result, the dissolution of a marriage is permitted without consideration of the events or conduct which may have led to the discord and the divorce, and the focus during the division of assets is the fact that the parties were…”
Kehrer v. Nationwide Ins., 25 Pa. D. & C.4th 1 (1995).
“§102 and 23 Pa.C.S. §102. It is because of the legislature’s ambiguous treatment of the term “court” that we may not rely with confidence on defendant’s argument that “court,” as it is used in section 8371, refers exclusively to a judge.”
— 23 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 102(a)(2) — 1 case
McCoy v. McCoy, 888 A.2d 906 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2005).
“Husband also argues that the trial court’s rebanee on Sinha is inapposite in that Sinha dealt with a unilateral divorce that required a three year period of living separate and apart under 23 Pa.C.S. § 102(a)(2). Despite the differences between Sinha and the instant case, the…”
— 23 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 102(a)(6) — 4 cases
Beasley v. Beasley, 518 A.2d 545 (Pa. 1986).
“]" 23 Pa.C.S. § 102(a)(6). While ordinarily this means that alimony should be based upon actual earnings, that is true only because ordinarily actual earnings accurately measure "ability to pay.”
Pacella v. Pacella, 492 A.2d 707 (Pa. 1985).
“]” 23 Pa.C.S. § 102(a)(6). While ordinarily this means that alimony should be based upon actual earnings, that is true only because ordinarily actual earnings accurately measure “ability to pay.”
Goldstein v. Goldstein, 512 A.2d 644 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1986).
“(Emphasis added) Section 401(c) was structured to “effectuate the purposes” of the Divorce Code, and these purposes are found in 23 Pa.C.S. § 102. Specifically relevant for our purposes are §§ 102(a)(6) and 102(b).”
McCullough v. McCullough, 41 Pa. D. & C.3d 115 (1985).
“23 Pa.C.S. § 102(a)(6). The evidence produced here does no more than show that respondent, on several occasions, has visited the home of Mr.”
— 23 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 102(b) — 1 case
Moritz v. Moritz, 33 Pa. D. & C.3d 521 (1985).
“See 23 Pa.C.S. § 102(b). . See 23 Pa.C.S. §401(d).”
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.