§ 503. Reassignment of matters.
(a) General rule.--The Supreme Court may by general rule provide for the assignment and reassignment
of classes of matters among the several courts of this Commonwealth and the magisterial
district judges as the needs of justice shall require and all laws shall be suspended
to the extent that they are inconsistent with such general rules.
(b) Procedures.--
(1) Rules adopted pursuant to subsection (a) shall be reported to the General Assembly
by the Chief Justice at or after the beginning of a regular session thereof, but not
later than May 1.
(2) Upon receipt, such rules shall be proposed to each house of the General Assembly as
a resolution or resolutions, shall be placed on the calendar of each house for the
next legislative day following their receipt, and shall be considered by each house
within 120 calendar days of continuous session by the General Assembly.
(3) Such rules shall take effect if they are approved by a majority vote of the duly elected
members of each house during such 120-day period, or may be disapproved by either
house during that period by a majority vote of the duly elected membership of each
house. The effective date of such rules shall be the date of approval of the last
of the two houses to act.
(4) Upon the expiration of the 120-day period after the delivery of such rules to the
two houses of the General Assembly and the failure to act as provided in paragraphs
(2) and (3), such rules shall become effective.
(5) For the purposes of this subsection, continuity of session shall be considered as
broken only by an adjournment of the General Assembly sine die; but in the computation
of the 120-day period, there shall be excluded the days on which either house is not
in session because of an adjournment of more than ten days to a day certain.
(6) Any such rules may, under provisions contained therein, be made operative at a time
later than the date on which such rules would otherwise take effect.
(Nov. 30, 2004, P.L.1618, No.207, eff. 60 days)
2004 Amendment. Act 207 amended subsec. (a). See section 29 of Act 207 in the appendix to this title
for special provisions relating to construction of law.
Cross References. Section 503 is referred to in sections 701, 704, 931, 932, 933, 1105, 1123, 1143,
1302, 1515, 1702, 1722, 3724, 5502 of this title.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
9
cases (
3 in the last 5 years), 2003–2026 · leading case:
Commonwealth v. Perfetto, 169 A.3d 1114 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2017).
Commonwealth v. Perfetto, 169 A.3d 1114 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2017).
· cites it 4× “” 42 Pa.C.S. § 503(a). 10 Pittsburgh and cities of the third class are also authorized to operate a traffic court.”
Mohamed v. Commonwealth, Dep't of Transp., 40 A.3d 1186 (Pa. 2012).
· cites it 6× “Justice Saylor's concurring opinion advocates for invocation of this Court's rulemaking authority pursuant to 42 Pa.C.S. § 503 to correct the asymmetrical appeal process in these types of cases.”
Stackhouse v. Commonwealth, 832 A.2d 1004 (Pa. 2003).
· cites it 2× “Further, if application of the jurisdictional statutes proves onerous to litigants or the courts, it is a matter for the General Assembly.”
Commonwealth v. Martorano, 89 A.3d 301 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2014).
· cites it 2× “See generally 42 Pa.C.S. § 503. . Appellee's PCRA petition was not transmitted to this Court as part of the certified record.”
M. Green v. PSP (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2021).
· cites it 3× “, concurring) (discussing 42 Pa.C.S. §503 and noting that “the General Assembly has given this Court the authority to alter jurisdictional assignments by means of rulemaking”).”
Com. of PA, ex rel. N.W. Ziccarelli, D.A. v. W. Geiger (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2024).
“rovides: The failure of an appellee to file an objection to the jurisdiction of an appellate court within such time as may be specified by general rule, shall, unless the appellate court otherwise orders, operate to perfect the appellate jurisdiction of such appellate court,…”
Com. of PA v. D.A. Reid, Jr. (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2026).
“1925(b), if the trial court “desires clarification of the errors complained of on appeal, the judge may enter an order directing the appellant to file of record in 6 Section 932 provides, “[e]xcept as otherwise prescribed by any general rule adopted pursuant to [S]ection 503[,…”
Com. v. Morris, D. (Pa. Super. Ct. 2014).
“42 Pa.C.S. § 503. Our Supreme Court has promulgated general rules which prescribe that in felony cases, the Municipal Court shall conduct the preliminary hearing, and if it holds the defendant for court on the felony charge, the Common Pleas Court shall conduct the defendant’s…”
— 42 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 503(a) — 4 cases
Commonwealth v. Perfetto, 169 A.3d 1114 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2017).
“” 42 Pa.C.S. § 503(a). 10 Pittsburgh and cities of the third class are also authorized to operate a traffic court.”
Mohamed v. Commonwealth, Dep't of Transp., 40 A.3d 1186 (Pa. 2012).
“Justice Saylor's concurring opinion advocates for invocation of this Court's rulemaking authority pursuant to 42 Pa.C.S. § 503 to correct the asymmetrical appeal process in these types of cases.”
M. Green v. PSP (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2021).
“, concurring) (discussing 42 Pa.C.S. §503 and noting that “the General Assembly has given this Court the authority to alter jurisdictional assignments by means of rulemaking”).”
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.