Comment:
Pa.R.A.P. 2185(a) recognizes that in cross-appeals the designated appellant's second brief is more extensive than a reply brief and, therefore, may require more than 14 days to prepare. See Pa.R.A.P.2136 (briefs in cases involving cross-appeals).
Subdivision(a)(3) clarifies practice in an appeal in which there is more than one appellant or appellee and all appellants or all appellees do not file their briefs on the same date. For example, if there are two appellants and one files early or one is granted an extension of time to file, the two briefs for appellants will not be filed or served on the same date. Subdivision (a)(3) makes clear when the appellee's 30-day period to file its brief begins. The same issue can arise with respect to the appellant's time for filing its reply brief when there are two or more appellees. Subdivision (a)(3) clarifies the point by starting the period on the date on which the latest, timely filed preceding brief is served.
Historical Commentary
The following commentary is historical in nature and represents statements of the Committee at the time of rulemaking:
Explanatory Comment-1979
The principal criticism of the new Appellate Rules has been the provisions for deferred preparation of the reproduced record, and the resulting procedure for the filing of advance copies of briefs (since the page citations to the reproduced record pages are not then available) followed by the later preparation and filing of definitive briefs with citations to the reproduced record pages. It has been argued that in the typical state court appeal the record is quite small, with the result that the pre-1976 practice of reproducing the record in conjunction with the preparation of appellant's definitive brief is entirely appropriate and would ordinarily be followed if the rules did not imply a preference for the deferred method. The Committee has been persuaded by these comments, and the rules have been redrafted to imply that the deferred method is a secondary method particularly appropriate for longer records.
Also, the number of briefs to be filed under the in forma pauperis procedure has been increased from ten to 15 in the Commonwealth and Superior Courts.
Explanatory Comment-2002
See Comment following Pa.R.A.P., Rule 511.
210 Pa. Code r. 2185
The 'Explanatory Comments'' are not previously codified in Rule 2185 as printed in 210 Pa. Code.