Rule Text
(a) General rule.—The statement of the questions involved must state concisely the issues to be resolved, expressed in the terms and circumstances of the case but without unnecessary detail. The statement will be deemed to include every subsidiary question fairly comprised therein. No question will be considered unless it is stated in the statement of questions involved or is fairly suggested thereby. Each question shall be followed by an answer stating simply whether the court or government unit agreed, disagreed, did not answer, or did not address the question. If a qualified answer was given to the question, appellant shall indicate the nature of the qualification, or if the question was not answered or addressed and the record shows the reason for such failure, the reason shall be stated briefly in each instance without quoting the court or government unit below.
(b) Discretionary aspects of sentence. An appellant who challenges the discretionary aspects of a sentence in a criminal matter shall include any questions relating to the discretionary aspects of the sentence imposed (but not the issue whether the appellate court should exercise its discretion to reach such question) in the statement required by paragraph (a). Failure to comply with this paragraph shall constitute a waiver of all issues relating to the discretionary aspects of sentence.
Amendment history: The provisions of this Rule 2116 amended May 16, 1979, effective September 30, 1979, 9 Pa.B. 1740; amended May 16, 1979, effective June 2, 1979, 9 Pa.B. 1753; amended July 11, 2008, effective 30 days after adoption and shall apply to all briefs filed after the effective date; amended March 27, 2013, effective and applies to all appeals and petitions for review filed 60 days after adoption, 43 Pa.B. 2007; amended May 28, 2014, effective July 1, 2014, 44 Pa.B. 3493. Immediately preceding text appears at serial page (366453).
Plain-English Summary (for reference only — not a substitute for the rule text above)
This summary is not the rule. The rule text controls.
When you file an appeal in Pennsylvania, you must include a section that clearly lists the legal questions you want the court to decide. You cannot just describe the situation in general terms. Each question needs to be specific to your case, and you must also state how the lower court answered each question, whether they agreed, disagreed, or never addressed it at all.
The court will only look at questions that appear in this section of your brief. If you leave out a question, the court will not consider it, even if you discuss it elsewhere in your filing. This is a strict rule, so you need to think carefully about every issue you want the appeals court to review before you submit your paperwork.
If you are appealing a criminal sentence and you think the judge used poor judgment in deciding how long your sentence should be, those questions must also appear in this section. If you forget to include them there, you lose the right to raise those issues. The court will treat them as waived, meaning they will not be heard at all.
Committee Notes
Paragraph (a)—In conjunction with the 2013 amendments to Pa.R.A.P. 2135 (length of briefs) and 2140 (brief on remand or following grant of reargument or reconsideration) adopting an optional word limit in lieu of page limits, the 2013 amendment eliminated the page limit for the statement of questions involved. The word count does, however, include the statement of questions, and a party should draft the statement of questions involved accordingly, with sufficient specificity to enable the reviewing court to readily identify the issues to be resolved while incorporating only those details that are relevant to disposition of the issues. Although the page limit on the statement of questions involved was eliminated in 2013, verbosity continues to be discouraged. The appellate courts strongly disfavor a statement that is not concise.
Paragraph (b)—The requirement set forth in Pa.R.A.P. 2116(b) is part of the procedure set forth by the Supreme Court to implement the standard set forth in 42 Pa.C.S. § 9781(b). Commonwealth v. Tuladziecki, 522 A.2d 17, 18 (Pa. 1987). See note to Pa.R.A.P. 902; note to Pa.R.A.P. 1115; and Pa.R.A.P. 2119(f) and the note thereto.
