# Commonwealth v. Lord

> Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · October 28, 1998 · 553 Pa. 415

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9648082

## Case

- **Full name:** COMMONWEALTH of Pennsylvania, Appellee, v. Frank LORD, Appellant
- **Court:** Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
- **Decided:** October 28, 1998
- **Citations:** 553 Pa. 415; 719 A.2d 306; 1998 Pa. LEXIS 2335
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Newman
- **Judges:** Flaherty, Zappala, Cappy, Castille, Nigro, Newman
- **Cited by:** 1,391 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- **Red flag:** Superseded by statute, as recognized in Commonwealth v. Burton.
- Negative treatments: 1
- Distinguished by: 0
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9648082

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- stating that “from this date forward, in order to preserve their claims for appellate review, appellants must comply whenever -3- J-S01025-20 the trial court orders them to file a Statement of Matters Complained of on Appeal pursuant to Rule 1925. Any issues not raised in a 19…
- holding that “from this date forward, in order to preserve their claims for appellate review, [a]ppellants must comply whenever the trial court orders them to file a Statement of Matters Complained of on Appeal pursuant to Rule 1925. Any issues not raised in a 1925(b) statemen…
- holding that “from this day forward, in order to preserve their claims for appellate review, Appellants must comply whenever the trial court orders them to file a Statement of Matters Complained of on Appeal pursuant to Rule 1925. Any issues not raised in a 1925(b) statement w…
- holding that “from this date forward . . . [a]ppellants must comply whenever the trial court orders -8- J-S20017-25 them to file a Statement of [Errors] Complained of on Appeal pursuant to Rule 1925 . . . [and a]ny issues not raised in a 1925(b) statement will be deemed waived”

## Opinion text

NEWMAN, Justice,
concurring.
Although I concur in the result reached by the Majority, I write separately to clarify the interplay between Rule 1410(B)(1)(c) and Rule 1925(b). The Majority notes that, “the potential for construing Rule 1410 as the exclusive provision for preserving an appellate issue is understandable.” Majority at 420, 719 A.2d at 309. I wish to emphasize that, while such an interpretation of Rule 1410 is “understandable,” it is nonetheless incorrect. Where the trial court orders an appellant to file a Statement of Matters Complained of on Appeal pursuant to Rule 1925(b), Rule 1410(B)(1)(c) will not save any issues omitted from such a statement from being waived.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9648082. Public record. Not legal advice.