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.
§ 6103. Jurisdiction.
(a) General rule.--The court shall have jurisdiction over all proceedings under this chapter.
(b) Effect of departure and nonresidence.--The right of the plaintiff to relief under this chapter shall not be affected by either
of the following:
(1) The plaintiff's leaving the residence or household to avoid further abuse.
(2) The defendant's absence from this Commonwealth or the defendant's nonresidence in
this Commonwealth, provided that the court has personal jurisdiction over the defendant
in accordance with 42 Pa.C.S. § 5322 (relating to bases of personal jurisdiction over
persons outside this Commonwealth).
(Nov. 10, 2005, P.L.335, No.66, eff. 180 days)
Notes of Decisions
N.T. ex rel. K.R.T. v. F.F., 118 A.3d 1130 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2015).
“23 Pa.C.S. § 6103 (emphasis added). Thus, the PFAA makes it clear that, in order for a petitioner to obtain relief against a nonresident defendant, a court must have personal jurisdiction over that defendant in accordance with Section 5322 of the Judicial Code, Pennsylvania’s…”
K.A.W. v. G.B. (Pa. Super. Ct. 2020).
“See 23 Pa.C.S. § 6103 (“The court shall have jurisdiction over all proceedings under this chapter.”
G.H. v. E.T.B. (Pa. Super. Ct. 2020).
“See 23 Pa.C.S. § 6103. Therefore, Appellant is not entitled to relief on this issue.”
H.S. v. D.S. (Pa. Super. Ct. 2023).
“23 Pa.C.S. § 6103. Therefore, H.S.’s right to relief is not affected by Appellant’s absence from and/or nonresidence in Pennsylvania, so long as the court has personal jurisdiction over Appellant in accordance with our long-arm statute, Section 5322.”
M.G. v. B.S. (Pa. Super. Ct. 2025).
“On appeal, Father argues that “[w]hile Pennsylvania courts have jurisdiction to enter PFA orders generally under 23 Pa.C.S. § 6103 [the PFA Act], their ability to make child custody determinations is limited by the UCCJEA.”
N.T. v. F.F. (Pa. Super. Ct. 2015).
“23 Pa.C.S. § 6103 (emphasis added). Thus, the PFAA makes it clear that, in order for a petitioner to obtain relief against a nonresident defendant, a -7- J-A08042-15 court must have personal jurisdiction over that defendant in accordance with Section 5322 of the Judicial Code,…”
N.T. ex rel. K.R.T. v. F.F., 118 A.3d 1130 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2015).
“23 Pa.C.S. § 6103 (emphasis added). Thus, the PFAA makes it clear that, in order for a petitioner to obtain relief against a nonresident defendant, a court must have personal jurisdiction over that defendant in accordance with Section 5322 of the Judicial Code, Pennsylvania’s…”
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.