Task: Wrong Candidate Generation
Input (English): not be quashed in light of the fact that the order did not appear to be final or appealable. In response, Appellants argued that the trial court’s order was final and appealable under Pa.R.A.P. 341, and, alternatively, that the order was a collateral order subject to an appeal as of right pursuant to Rule 313. The Superior Court nevertheless quashed the appeal in a per curiam order dated April 10, 2015, concluding the trial court’s order denying the petition to intervene was “not a final order in the custody matter and thus not final or appealable.” K.C. and V.C. v. L.A., 499 EDA 2015, 1 (Pa.Super. filed 4/10/15) (order) (citing Pa.R.A.P. 341(b)(1) (“A final order is any order that: (1) dis poses of all claims and of all parties”); G.B. v. M.M.B., Pa.Super. 133, 670 A.2d 714 (1996) (<HOLDING>); Boise Cascade Corp. v. East Stroudsburg 
 Holding statements: (A) holding that the uccja applied to a california child custody order granting temporary custody of two children to their father (B) holding that a temporary order granting emergency relief and temporary child custody under the domestic violence act is not immediately appealable (C) holding order awarding father temporary partial custody prior to custody hearing was not final and appealable under rule 341 (D) holding that temporary order amounted to order modifying custody of children because language changed custody for an indefinite period (E) holding that temporary order completely transferred custody without setting further hearing writ action was fully terminated and final adjudication of custody was affected
Output (English): holding that temporary order amounted to order modifying custody of children because language changed custody for an indefinite period