IN RE AMENDMENT OF THE NOTE TO RULE 1114, 208 (Pa. 2-4-2011)

IN RE AMENDMENT OF THE NOTE TO RULE 1114 OF THE PENNSYLVANIA RULES OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE.

No. 208.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania.
February 4, 2011.

Appellate Procedural Rules

ORDER
PER CURIAM.

AND NOW, this 4th day of February, 2011, upon the recommendation of the Appellate Court Procedural Rules Committee; the proposal having been submitted without publication pursuant to Pa.R.J.A.103(a)(3) in the interests of justice and efficient administration:

IT IS ORDERED pursuant to Article V, Section 10 of the Constitution of Pennsylvania that the Note to Pennsylvania Rule of Appellate Procedure 1114 is amended in the attached form.

This ORDER shall be processed in accordance with Pa.R.J.A. No. 103(b), shall be effective in 30 days, and shall be applicable to petitions filed thereafter.

Additions to the rule are shown in bold and are underlined. Deletions from the rule are shown in bold and brackets.

Page 1

Rule 1114. Considerations Governing Allowance of Appeal.

Except as prescribed in Rule 1101 (appeals as of right from the Commonwealth Court), review of a final order of the Superior Court or the Commonwealth Court is not a matter of right, but of sound judicial discretion, and an appeal will be allowed only when there are special and important reasons therefor.

Official Note: Based in part on U.S. Supreme Court Rule [19] 10. The following, while neither controlling nor fully measuring the discretion of the Supreme Court, indicate the character of the reasons which will be considered:

[(1) Where the appellate court below has decided a question ofsubstance not theretofore determined by the Supreme Court, or hasdecided it in a way probably not in accord with applicable decisionsof the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania or the Supreme Court of theUnited States.
(2) Where an appellate court has rendered a decision in conflict withthe decision of the other appellate court below on the same question, orhas so far departed from the accepted and usual course of judicialproceedings, or so far sanctioned such a departure by an administrativeagency or lower court, as to call for an exercise of the power ofsupervision of the Supreme Court.
(3) Where the question involves an issue of immediate public importancesuch as would justify assumption of plenary jurisdiction under42 Pa.C.S. § 726 (extraordinary jurisdiction).]

(1) the holding of the intermediate appellate court conflicts withanother intermediate appellate court opinion;
(2) the holding of the intermediate appellate court conflicts with aholding of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court or the United States SupremeCourt on the same legal question;
(3) the question presented is one of first impression;
(4) the question presented is of such substantial public importance asto require prompt and definitive resolution by the Pennsylvania SupremeCourt;
(5) the issue involves the constitutionality of a statute of thisCommonwealth;

Page 2

(6) the intermediate appellate court has so far departed from acceptedjudicial practices or so abused its discretion as to call for theexercise of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court’s supervisory authority; or
(7) an intermediate appellate court has erroneously entered anorder quashing or dismissing an appeal.
Prior to the 2011 amendment to the Official Note to this Rule, theprocedural mechanism to seek the Pennsylvania Supreme Court’s review of anintermediate appellate court order quashing or dismissing an appeal wasby petition for review. See Vaccone v. Syken, 587 Pa. 380, 382 n. 2,899 A.2d 1103, 1104 n. 2 (2006). The current amendments now provide thatsuch appeals should be pursued by the petition for allowance of appealprocess. The 2011 amendment adds Reason (7) to the Official Note, whichprovides a basis for seeking review of intermediate appellate courtquashals and dismissals through the Chapter 11 petition for allowance ofappeal procedure, rather than the Chapter 15 petition for reviewprocedure.

Page 1