Rule 341 Final Orders; Generally

Related Constitutional and statutory provisions—Section 9 of Article V of the Constitution of Pennsylvania provides that ‘‘there shall be a right of appeal from a court of record or from an administrative agency to a court of record or to an appellate court.’’ The constitutional provision is implemented by 2 Pa.C.S. § 702, 2 Pa.C.S. § 752, and 42 Pa.C.S. § 5105.

Criminal law proceedings—Commonwealth appeals—Orders that do not dispose of the entire case that were formerly appealable by the Commonwealth in criminal cases under Pa.R.A.P. 341 are appealable as interlocutory appeals as of right under Pa.R.A.P. 311(d).

Final orders—pre- and post-1992 practice—The 1992 amendment generally eliminated appeals as of right under Pa.R.A.P. 341 from orders that do not end the litigation as to all claims and as to all parties. Prior to 1992, there were cases that deemed an order final if it had the practical effect of putting a party out of court, even if the order did not end the litigation as to all claims and all parties.

A party needs to file only a single notice of appeal to secure review of prior non-final orders that are made final by the entry of a final order. See, e.g., K.H. v. J.R., 826 A.2d 863, 870-71 (Pa. 2003) (notice of appeal following trial); Betz v. Pneumo Abex LLC, 44 A.3d 27, 54 (Pa. 2012) (notice of appeal of summary judgment); Laster v. Unemployment Comp. Bd. of Rev., 80 A.3d 831, 832 n.2 (Pa.Cmwlth. 2013) (petition for review of agency decision). See also Pa.R.A.P. 904, cmt. at [para ] 2.

If, however, one or more orders resolves issues arising on more than one docket or relating to more than one judgment, separate notices of appeal must be filed. Malanchuk v. Tsimura, 137 A.3d 1283, 1288 (Pa. 2016) (‘‘[C]omplete consolidation (or merger or fusion of actions) does not occur absent a complete identity of parties and claims; separate actions lacking such overlap retain their separate identities and require distinct judgments’’); Commonwealth v. C.M.K., 932 A.2d 111, 113 & n.3 (Pa. Super. 2007) (quashing appeal taken by single notice of appeal from order on remand for consideration under Pa.R.Crim.P. 607 of two persons’ judgments of sentence).

Rescission of subdivision (b)(2)—Former subdivision (b)(2) provided for appeals of orders defined as final by statute. The 2015 rescission of subdivision (b)(2) eliminated a potential waiver trap created by legislative use of the adjective ‘‘final’’ to describe orders that were procedurally interlocutory but nonetheless designated as appealable as of right. Failure to appeal immediately an interlocutory order deemed final by statute waived the right to challenge the order on appeal from the final judgment. Rescinding subdivision (b)(2) eliminated this potential waiver of the right to appeal. If an order designated as appealable by a statute disposes of all claims and of all parties, it is appealable as a final order pursuant to Pa.R.A.P. 341. If the order does not meet that standard, then it is interlocutory regardless of the statutory description. Pa.R.A.P. 311(a)(8) provides for appeal as of right from an order that is made final or appealable by statute or general rule, even though the order does not dispose of all claims or of all parties and, thus, is interlocutory. Pa.R.A.P. 311(g) addresses waiver if no appeal is taken immediately from such interlocutory order.

One of the further effects of the rescission of subdivision (b)(2) is to change the basis for appealability of orders that do not end the case but grant or deny a declaratory judgment. See Nationwide Mut. Ins. Co. v. Wickett, 763 A.2d 813, 818 (Pa. 2000); Pa. Bankers Ass’n v. Pa. Dep’t of Banking, 948 A.2d 790, 798 (Pa. 2008). The effect of the rescission is to eliminate waiver for failure to take an immediate appeal from such an order. A party aggrieved by an interlocutory order granting or denying a declaratory judgment, where the order satisfies the criteria for ‘‘finality’’ under Pennsylvania Bankers Association, may elect to proceed under Pa.R.A.P. 311(a)(8) or wait until the end of the case and proceed under subdivision (b)(1) of this rule.

An arbitration order appealable under 42 Pa.C.S. § 7320(a) may be interlocutory or final. If it disposes of all claims and all parties, it is final, and, thus, appealable pursuant to Pa.R.A.P. 341. If the order does not dispose of all claims and all parties, that is, the order is not final, but rather interlocutory, it is appealable pursuant to Pa.R.A.P. 311. Failure to appeal an interlocutory order appealable as of right may result in waiver of objections to the order. See Pa.R.A.P. 311(g).

Subdivision (c)—Determination of finality—Subdivision (c) permits an immediate appeal from an order dismissing less than all claims or parties from a case only upon an express determination that an immediate appeal would facilitate resolution of the entire case. Factors to be considered under subdivision (c) include, but are not limited to:

(1) whether there is a significant relationship between adjudicated and unadjudicated claims;

(2) whether there is a possibility that an appeal would be mooted by further developments;

(3) whether there is a possibility that the court or government unit will consider issues a second time; and

(4) whether an immediate appeal will enhance prospects of settlement.

The failure of a party to apply to the government unit or trial court for a determination of finality pursuant to subdivision (c) shall not constitute a waiver and the matter may be raised in a subsequent appeal following the entry of a final order disposing of all claims and all parties.

Where the government unit or trial court refuses to amend its order to include the express determination that an immediate appeal would facilitate resolution of the entire case and refuses to enter a final order, a petition for permission to appeal under Pa.R.A.P. 1311 of the unappealable order of denial is the exclusive mode of review. The filing of such a petition does not prevent the trial court or other government unit from proceeding further with the matter pursuant to Pa.R.A.P. 1701(b)(6). Of course, as in any case, the appellant may apply for a discretionary stay of the proceeding below.

Subdivision (c)(2) provides for a stay of the action pending determination of an application for a determination of finality. If the application is denied, and a petition for permission to appeal is filed challenging the denial, a stay or supersedeas will issue only as provided under Chapter 17 of these rules.

In the event that a trial court or other government unit enters a final order pursuant to subdivision (c), the trial court or other government unit may no longer proceed further in the matter, except as provided in Pa.R.A.P. 1701(b)(1)—(b)(5).

Subdivision (f)—Post Conviction Relief Act Orders—A failure to timely file an appeal pursuant to subdivision (f)(2) shall constitute a waiver of all objections to such an order.

Pa.R.A.P. 902 addresses whether separate notices of appeal are required to be filed where an order appealable under this rule is entered on more than one docket.