Rule 2544. Contents of Application for Reargument.

 (a)  General rule.—The application for reargument need not be set forth in numbered paragraphs in the manner of a pleading, and shall contain the following (which shall, insofar as practicable, be set forth in the order stated):

   (1)  A reference to the order in question, or the portions thereof sought to be reargued, and the date of its entry in the appellate court. If the order is voluminous, it may, if more convenient, be appended to the application.

   (2)  A specification with particularity of the points of law or fact supposed to have been overlooked or misapprehended by the court.

   (3)  A concise statement of the reasons relied upon for allowance of reargument. See Rule 2543 (considerations governing allowance of reargument).

   (4)  There shall be appended to the application a copy of any opinions delivered relating to the order with respect to which reargument is sought, and, if reference thereto is necessary to ascertain the grounds of the application for reargument, slip opinions in related cases. If whatever is required by this paragraph to be appended to the application is voluminous, it may, if more convenient, be separately presented.

 (b)  No supporting brief.—All contentions in support of an application for reargument shall be set forth in the body of the application as prescribed by Paragraph (a)(3) of this rule. No separate brief in support of an application for reargument will be received, and the prothonotary of the appellate court will refuse to file any application for reargument to which is annexed or appended any supporting brief.

 (c)  Length.—Except by permission of the court, an application for reargument shall not exceed 15 pages when produced on a word processor/computer or typewriter, exclusive of pages containing table of contents, table of citations and any addendum containing opinions, etc., or any other similar supplementary matter provided for by this rule.

 (d)  Essential requisites of application.—The failure of an applicant to present with accuracy, brevity, and clearness whatever is essential to a ready and adequate understanding of the points requiring reconsideration will be a sufficient reason for denying the application.

 (e)  Multiple applicants.—Where permitted by Rule 512 (joint appeals) a single application for reargument may be filed.

   Official Note

   Former Supreme Court Rule 64, and former Superior Court Rule 113A permitted the applicant in effect to dump an undigested mass of material (i.e., briefs in and opinions of the court) in the lap of the court, with the burden on the individual judges and their law clerks to winnow the wheat from the chaff. This rule, which is patterned after Rule 1115 (content of petition for allowance of appeal), places the burden on the applicant to prepare a self-contained succinct and coherent presentation of the case and the reasons in support of allowance of reargument.

   The provisions of this Rule 2544 amended December 11, 1978, effective December 30, 1978, 8 Pa.B. 3802; amended September 22, 2006, effective immediately, 36 Pa.B. 6086. Immediately preceding text appears at serial pages (236412) to (236413).