Task: Wrong Candidate Generation
Input (English): the disposition of appellee’s remaining claims. NIGRO, J., files a concurring opinion. CAPPY, J., concurs in the result. 1 . 35 P.S. § 780-113(a)(16). 2 . 35 P.S. § 780-113(a)(30). 3 . 18 Pa.C.S. § 2702(a)(3). Appellee struck Officer Eberlein in the nose during the struggle. 4 . 18 Pa.C.S. § 5104. 5 . This instruction regarding the jury's obligation to reach an agreement is in complete harmony with the American Bar Association’s approved instruction which this Court specifically recommended in Commonwealth v. Spencer, 442 Pa. 328, 337-38, 275 A.2d 299, 304-05 (1971). 6 . In so doing, the Superior Court found it unnecessary to address other issues raised on appeal. 7 . This Court may raise the issue of waiver sua sponte. Commonwealth v. Triplett, 476 Pa. 83, 89, 381 A.2d 877, 881 (1977) (<HOLDING>). 8 . There are comparable rules requiring 
 Holding statements: (A) holding that failure to raise issue in brief constitutes waiver of appeal of the issue (B) holding lack of subjectmatter jurisdiction is fundamental error that this court may properly raise and recognize sua sponte (C) holding that a court can raise the issue of res judicata sua sponte in order to affirm a grant of summary judgment (D) holding that the district court had no right to apply the statute of limitations sua sponte because it had been waived (E) holding that although the issue of waiver as to the appellants allegation of trial court error had not been addressed by either party this court could raise the issue of waiver sua sponte
Output (English): holding that the district court had no right to apply the statute of limitations sua sponte because it had been waived