Pa. Cons. Stat. » 42 Pa. Cons. Stat. (JUDICIARY) / Chapter 55
Pennsylvania Consolidated Statutes

42 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 5504 (2026)

  Judicial extension of time.

✓ laws through the 2026 session (checked Sept. 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

§ 5504.  Judicial extension of time.

(a)  General rule.--Except as provided in section 1722 (c) (relating to time limitations) or in subsection (b) of this section, the time limited by this chapter shall not be extended by order, rule or otherwise.

(b)  Fraud.--The time limited by this chapter may be extended to relieve fraud or its equivalent, but there shall be no extension of time as a matter of indulgence or with respect to any criminal proceeding.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 26 cases (5 in the last 5 years), 1989–2024 · leading case: Bailey v. Tucker, 621 A.2d 108 (Pa. 1993).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Bailey v. Tucker, 621 A.2d 108 (Pa. 1993). · cites it 2× “See 42 Pa.C.S. § 5504. However, appellant has not alleged that a written contract existed between himself and appellee.”
Mariner Chestnut Partners, L.P. Ex Rel. Lamm v. Lenfest, 152 A.3d 265 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2016). “42 Pa.C.S. § 5504 (emphasis added). This section expressly prohibits judicial extensions of the time to commence an action.”
Pendle Hill v. The ZHB of Nether Providence Twp. Appeal of: W. Brophy & E. Brophy, 134 A.3d 1187 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2016). “An exception to this rule occurs where fraud or some other circumstance exists that is ‘so grave or compelling as to constitute extraordinary cause justifying intervention by the court,’ allowing the court to open or vacate its order after the SO day period has expired.”
In re Consol. Return of Real Est. Tax Sale Conducted on November 10, 2011 by the Tax Claim Bureau of the Cnty. of Luzerne Under Provisions of the Act of July 7, 1947, P.L. 1368 Section 607, 74 A.3d 1089 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2013). · cites it 2× “Further, 42 Pa.C.S. § 5504 (Judicial extension of time) provides: (a) General Rule-Except as provided in Section 1722(c) (relating to time limitations) or in subsection (b) of this Section, time limited by this chapter shall not be extended by order, rule or otherwise.”
Astech Int'l, LLC v. Husick, 676 F. Supp. 2d 389 (E.D. Pa. 2009). “42 Pa. Cons. Stat. Ann. § 5504(b). Like cases in which the discovery rule applies, fraudulent concealment operates to toll the statute of limitations “only until such time as the plaintiff discovers or reasonably should have discovered the fraud.”
Commonwealth v. Laventure, 894 A.2d 109 (Pa. 2006). “1957))); 8 accord 42 Pa.C.S. § 5504 (providing, subject to *362 limited exception not applicable here, “the time limited by this chapter shall not be extended by order, rule or otherwise”).”
Ainsworth v. Commonwealth, Dep't of Transp., Bureau of Driver Licensing, 807 A.2d 933 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2002). “” Section 5505 restricts the power of the courts to amend, modify or vacate final orders to 30 days from the date the order is entered. An exception to this rule occurs where fraud or some other circumstance exists that is “so grave or compelling as to constitute extraordinary…”
Cross v. Meisel, 720 F. Supp. 486 (E.D. Pa. 1989). “42 Pa.Cons.Stat.Ann. § 5504(a) (Purdon 1981); see also Commonwealth v.”
Bywaters v. Bywaters, 721 F. Supp. 84 (E.D. Pa. 1989). “Van Bus-kirk and Mihalcik , however, are distinguishable from the instant ease, because tolling on grounds of fraud or equitable estoppel is governed not by § 5532, but by an entirely different section of the Pennsylvania statute, 42 Pa.Cons.Stat. § 5504. 8 The cases which…”
Ecore Int'l, Inc. v. Downey, 343 F. Supp. 3d 459 (E.D. Pa. 2018). “2011) (citing 42 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 5504 and discussing "the more lenient federal standard" for equitable tolling).”
J. Robins v. M. Ward & Gen. Manager of Delaware Cnty. Dept of Pub. Welfare, No. 1789 C.D. 2017 (Pa. Commw. Ct. Aug. 15, 2018). · cites it 2× “§5524, allows for a two-year statute of limitations for actions of fraud, which may be extended under section 5504(b) of the Judicial Code, 42 Pa.C.S. §5504(b), such that an action does not accrue until the party suffers actual injury.”
Oldham v. The Pennsylvania State Univ., No. 4:20-cv-02364, 2022 WL 1528305 (M.D. Pa. May 13, 2022). · cites it 2× “2011) (citing 42 Pa. C.S. § 5504(a); Aivazoglou v. Drever Furnaces, 613 A.”
Show all 26 citing cases →
42 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 5504(a): 3 cases
Cross v. Meisel, 720 F. Supp. 486 (E.D. Pa. 1989). “42 Pa.Cons.Stat.Ann. § 5504(a) (Purdon 1981); see also Commonwealth v.”
Oldham v. The Pennsylvania State Univ., No. 4:20-cv-02364, 2022 WL 1528305 (M.D. Pa. May 13, 2022). “2011) (citing 42 Pa. C.S. § 5504(a); Aivazoglou v. Drever Furnaces, 613 A.”
Monserrate Zapata v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, 530 F. App'x 95 (3d Cir. 2013).
42 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 5504(b): 2 cases
Astech Int'l, LLC v. Husick, 676 F. Supp. 2d 389 (E.D. Pa. 2009). “42 Pa. Cons. Stat. Ann. § 5504(b). Like cases in which the discovery rule applies, fraudulent concealment operates to toll the statute of limitations “only until such time as the plaintiff discovers or reasonably should have discovered the fraud.”
J. Robins v. M. Ward & Gen. Manager of Delaware Cnty. Dept of Pub. Welfare, No. 1789 C.D. 2017 (Pa. Commw. Ct. Aug. 15, 2018). “§5524, allows for a two-year statute of limitations for actions of fraud, which may be extended under section 5504(b) of the Judicial Code, 42 Pa.C.S. §5504(b), such that an action does not accrue until the party suffers actual injury.”
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.