Pa. Cons. Stat. » 42 Pa. Cons. Stat. (JUDICIARY) / Chapter 5
Pennsylvania Consolidated Statutes

42 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 541 (2026)

 Superior 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

 

 

SUBCHAPTER B

SUPERIOR COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

 

Sec.

541.  Superior Court.

542.  Powers of Superior Court.

543.  Seat of court.

544.  Additional judges.

 

Cross References.  Subchapter B is referred to in section 102 of this title.

§ 541.  Superior Court.

The Superior Court of Pennsylvania shall consist of 15 judges.

(June 11, 1980, P.L.213, No.63, eff. imd.)

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 4 cases, 1983–2017 · leading case: Commonwealth v. Lesko, 501 A.2d 200 (Pa. 1985).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Commonwealth v. Lesko, 501 A.2d 200 (Pa. 1985). · cites it 2× “63, 42 Pa.C.S. § 541, increasing the size of Superior Court from seven to fifteen members.”
United States v. Union Corp., 277 F. Supp. 2d 478 (E.D. Pa. 2003). “§§ 8321-27 (“PUCTA”) as it is not liable under CERCLA and is therefore not a joint tortfeasor; and 5) the City is immune from liability under the Pennsylvania Political Subdivision Tort Claims Act, 42 Pa. C.S. § 541 et seq. (“PSTCA”). In opposition, defendants argue that 1) this…”
Commonwealth v. Smallwood, 155 A.3d 1054 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2017). “63, 42 Pa.C.S. § 541, which increased the size of Superior Court from seven to fifteen members.”
Surrick v. Hoffman, 458 A.2d 940 (Pa. 1983). · cites it 2× “See 42 Pa.C.S. §§ 541, 561 and 911(a). Thus, the use of the additional manpower supplied by former and retired judges is only for the unusual situation and is not to be considered a permanent supplement to the regular complement of judges within a court or district.”
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.