Pennsylvania Consolidated Statutes
42 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 742 (2026)
Appeals from courts of common pleas.
✓ 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
§ 742. Appeals from courts of common pleas.
The Superior Court shall have exclusive appellate jurisdiction of all appeals from final orders of the courts of common pleas, regardless of the nature of the controversy or the amount involved, except such classes of appeals as are by any provision of this chapter within the exclusive jurisdiction of the Supreme Court or the Commonwealth Court.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 235
cases (35 in the last 5 years), 1978–2026 · leading case: Commonwealth v. Garcia, 43 A.3d 470 (Pa. 2012).
Commonwealth v. Garcia, 43 A.3d 470 (Pa. 2012). “Before this Court, the Commonwealth contends that the Superior Court did not have jurisdiction over the case because no order of the Court of Common Pleas had been entered from which Defendant could have appealed to the Superior Court pursuant to 42 Pa.C.S. § 742. [6]…”
Hutchison v. Luddy, 606 A.2d 905 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1992). “See 42 Pa.C.S. § 742; Pa.R.A.P. 702, 42 Pa.C.”
Commonwealth v. Mouzon, 812 A.2d 617 (Pa. 2002). “As a general matter, the legislature has granted the Superior Court "exclusive appellate jurisdiction of all appeals from final orders of the courts of common pleas ... except such classes of appeals as are.”
Commonwealth v. Cohen, 605 A.2d 1212 (Pa. 1992). “The primary issue is the appealability of the grant of a motion in limine pursuant to which the trial court excludes *557 Commonwealth evidence, effectively terminating or substantially handicapping the prosecution.”
McCutcheon v. Philadelphia Elec. Co., 788 A.2d 345 (Pa. 2002). “Therefore, the Superior Court did not have appellate jurisdiction pursuant to 42 Pa.C.S. § 742, and the order it issued is void.”
McCutcheon v. Philadelphia Elec. Co., 788 A.2d 345 (Pa. 2002). “Therefore, the Superior Court did not have appellate jurisdiction pursuant to 42 Pa.C.S. § 742, and the order it issued is void.”
Commonwealth v. White, 910 A.2d 648 (Pa. 2006). “See 42 Pa. C.S. § 742 (providing appellate jurisdiction to Superior Court over "final orders"); id.”
Commonwealth v. Grove, 170 A.3d 1127 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2017). “” 42 Pa.C.S. § 742. Rule of Appellate Procedure 341 defines “final order” as, among other things, any order that “disposes of all claims and of all parties.”
Turner Constr. v. Plumbers Local 690, 130 A.3d 47 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2015). “2002) (absent a final order, “the Superior Court did not have appellate jurisdiction pursuant to 42 Pa.C.S. § 742, and the order it issued is void.”
Commonwealth v. McGarry, 172 A.3d 60 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2017). “”); 42 Pa.C.S. § 742 (“The Superior Court shall have exclusive appellate jurisdiction of all appeals from final orders of the courts of common pleas,” subject, to some exceptions).”
Commonwealth v. Krum, 533 A.2d 134 (Pa. 1987). “42 Pa.C.S. § 742. Such an appeal may generally be taken as of right by filing a notice of appeal with the clerk of the lower court within the time allowed for such appeal.”
Redevelopment Auth. of Cambria Cnty. v. Int'l Ins. Co., 685 A.2d 581 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1996). “Thus, despite the diligent advocacy of counsel for the Authority, the sole appeal now pending before this Court is the direct appeal as of right from the order entered by Judge Leahey on February 7, 1995, an appeal which International contends we must quash as interlocutory.”
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.