Pennsylvania Consolidated Statutes

42 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 5104 (2026)

Trial by jury.

✓ 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

§ 5104. Trial by jury.

(a) General rule.--Except where the right to trial by jury is enlarged by statute, trial by jury shall be as heretofore, and the right thereof shall remain inviolate. Trial by jury may be waived in the manner prescribed by general rules.

(b) Civil verdicts.--In any civil case a verdict rendered by at least five-sixths of the jury shall be the verdict of the jury and shall have the same effect as a unanimous verdict of the jury.

(c) Criminal matters.--In criminal cases the Commonwealth shall have the same right to trial by jury as does the accused.

(Apr. 28, 1978, P.L.202, No.53, eff. 60 days)

1978 Amendment. Act 53 amended subsec. (a) and added subsec. (c).

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 44 cases (6 in the last 5 years), 1979–2025 · leading case: Commonwealth v. Sorrell, 456 A.2d 1326 (Pa. 1982).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Commonwealth v. Sorrell, 456 A.2d 1326 (Pa. 1982). · cites it 26× “The requests were opposed by the Commonwealth, which asserted an absolute right to jury trial pursuant to 42 Pa.C.S. § 5104(c). At Nos. 14 and 15 Appeal Docket 1982 (E.”

Fritz v. Wright, 907 A.2d 1083 (Pa. 2006). · cites it 20× “The General Assembly then promulgated the five-sixths verdict in subsection 5104(a) and (b) of the Judicial Code, 42 Pa.C.S. § 5104(a), (b). The unanimity feature, therefore, was changed.”

Blum v. Merrell Dow Pharm., Inc., 626 A.2d 537 (Pa. 1993). · cites it 10× “Subsequently, the Legislature codified the five-sixths rule by passing section 5104 of the Judicial Code, 42 Pa.C.S. § 5104. [8] Subsections 5104(a) and (b) of the Judicial Code provide: § 5104.”

Commonwealth v. Wharton, 435 A.2d 158 (Pa. 1981). · cites it 10× “In so doing, the courts properly held unconstitutional 42 Pa. C.S. § 5104(c), which inters this Court’s Rule 1101 by granting the Commonwealth an absolute right to jury trial upon demand.”

Wertz v. Chapman Twp., 741 A.2d 1272 (Pa. 1999). · cites it 4× “I, § 6; [1] 42 Pa.C.S. § 5104(a). [2] It has never been the law in this Commonwealth that an individual is entitled to a jury trial only where that right is specifically provided in legislation.”

Commonwealth v. McMullen, 961 A.2d 842 (Pa. 2008). · cites it 2× “Sorrell struck down 42 Pa. C.S. § 5104(c) as unconstitutional and suspended it; Section 5104(c) provided, "In criminal cases the Commonwealth shall have the same right to trial by jury as does the accused.”

Commonwealth v. Simmons, 565 A.2d 481 (Pa. 1989). · cites it 6× “There, in sustaining the Career Criminal Program against constitutional attack, we observed that our Supreme Court's concern and ultimate ruling of unconstitutionality of 42 Pa.C.S. § 5104(c) in Commonwealth v. Sorrell, supra, because of a lack of prosecutorial accountability in…”

Bruckshaw v. Frankford Hosp. of the Philadelphia, 58 A.3d 102 (Pa. 2012). · cites it 2× “”); 42 Pa.C.S. § 5104(a) (“Except where the right to trial by jury is enlarged by statute, trial by jury shall be as heretofore, and the right thereof shall remain inviolate”).”

Commonwealth v. Siers, 464 A.2d 1307 (Pa. 1983). · cites it 6× “2d 1326 (1982), our Supreme Court held that the Commonwealth has no right to a jury trial and that 42 Pa.C.S. § 5104(c) which provided for such a right was unconstitutional.”

Kardibin v. Associated Hardware, 426 A.2d 649 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1981). · cites it 3× “S. § 925 (now substantially re-enacted, Act of July 9, 1976, P.”

Pratt v. St. Christopher's Hosp., 866 A.2d 313 (Pa. 2005). · cites it 2× “See 42 Pa.C.S. § 5104(b) (providing that in civil cases a verdict rendered by at least five-sixths of the jurors has the same effect as a unanimous verdict).”

Commonwealth v. Sorrell, 465 A.2d 1250 (Pa. 1983). · cites it 3× “We reverse and remand for a new trial because: 1) 42 Pa.C.S. § 5104(c) pursuant to which the lower court denied appellant’s attempt to waive his right to jury trial, has been declared unconstitutional by our Supreme Court; and 2) certain incriminating statements made by…”

Show all 44 citing cases →

— 42 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 5104(a) — 12 cases

Blum v. Merrell Dow Pharm., Inc., 626 A.2d 537 (Pa. 1993). “Subsequently, the Legislature codified the five-sixths rule by passing section 5104 of the Judicial Code, 42 Pa.C.S. § 5104. [8] Subsections 5104(a) and (b) of the Judicial Code provide: § 5104.”

Wertz v. Chapman Twp., 741 A.2d 1272 (Pa. 1999). “I, § 6; [1] 42 Pa.C.S. § 5104(a). [2] It has never been the law in this Commonwealth that an individual is entitled to a jury trial only where that right is specifically provided in legislation.”

Fritz v. Wright, 907 A.2d 1083 (Pa. 2006). “The General Assembly then promulgated the five-sixths verdict in subsection 5104(a) and (b) of the Judicial Code, 42 Pa.C.S. § 5104(a), (b). The unanimity feature, therefore, was changed.”

Bruckshaw v. Frankford Hosp. of the Philadelphia, 58 A.3d 102 (Pa. 2012). “”); 42 Pa.C.S. § 5104(a) (“Except where the right to trial by jury is enlarged by statute, trial by jury shall be as heretofore, and the right thereof shall remain inviolate”).”

Rodney v. Wise, 500 A.2d 1187 (Pa. 1985).

— 42 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 5104(b) — 10 cases

Pratt v. St. Christopher's Hosp., 866 A.2d 313 (Pa. 2005). “See 42 Pa.C.S. § 5104(b) (providing that in civil cases a verdict rendered by at least five-sixths of the jurors has the same effect as a unanimous verdict).”

Kardibin v. Associated Hardware, 426 A.2d 649 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1981). “S. § 925 (now substantially re-enacted, Act of July 9, 1976, P.”

— 42 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 5104(c) — 16 cases

Commonwealth v. Sorrell, 456 A.2d 1326 (Pa. 1982). “The requests were opposed by the Commonwealth, which asserted an absolute right to jury trial pursuant to 42 Pa.C.S. § 5104(c). At Nos. 14 and 15 Appeal Docket 1982 (E.”

Commonwealth v. Wharton, 435 A.2d 158 (Pa. 1981). “In so doing, the courts properly held unconstitutional 42 Pa. C.S. § 5104(c), which inters this Court’s Rule 1101 by granting the Commonwealth an absolute right to jury trial upon demand.”

Commonwealth v. McMullen, 961 A.2d 842 (Pa. 2008). “Sorrell struck down 42 Pa. C.S. § 5104(c) as unconstitutional and suspended it; Section 5104(c) provided, "In criminal cases the Commonwealth shall have the same right to trial by jury as does the accused.”

Commonwealth v. Simmons, 565 A.2d 481 (Pa. 1989). “There, in sustaining the Career Criminal Program against constitutional attack, we observed that our Supreme Court's concern and ultimate ruling of unconstitutionality of 42 Pa.C.S. § 5104(c) in Commonwealth v. Sorrell, supra, because of a lack of prosecutorial accountability in…”

Commonwealth v. Siers, 464 A.2d 1307 (Pa. 1983). “2d 1326 (1982), our Supreme Court held that the Commonwealth has no right to a jury trial and that 42 Pa.C.S. § 5104(c) which provided for such a right was unconstitutional.”

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.