SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

COMMITTEE ON RULES OF EVIDENCE

ORPHANS’ COURT PROCEDURAL RULES COMMITTEE

CRIMINAL PROCEDURAL RULES COMMITTEE

JUVENILE COURT PROCEDURAL RULES COMMITTEE

MINOR COURT RULES COMMITTEE

ADOPTION REPORT

Amendment of Pa.R.E. 201

Adoption of Pa.R.O.C.P. 1.22, Pa.R.Crim.P. 102.1, 

Pa.R.J.C.P. 138 and 1138, and Pa.R.Civ.P.M.D.J. 242

On February 13, 2023, the Supreme Court amended Pennsylvania Rule of 

Evidence 201 and adopted Pennsylvania Rule of Orphans’ Court Procedure 1.22, 

Pennsylvania Rule of Criminal Procedure 102.1, Pennsylvania Rules of Juvenile Court 

Procedure 138 and 1138, and Pennsylvania Rule of Civil Procedure Before Magisterial 

District Judges 242 to permit the parties and the court to cite non-precedential 

intermediate appellate court opinions and single-judge opinions of the Commonwealth 

Court in election law matters, in accordance with Pa.R.A.P. 126. The Rules Committees 

have prepared this Adoption Report describing the rulemaking process. An Adoption 

Report should not be confused with Comments to the rules. See Pa.R.J.A. 103, cmt. The 

statements contained herein are those of the Committees, not the Court.

On January 5, 2022, the Court adopted a recommendation of the Civil Procedural 

Rules Committee to permit the citation of authority in accordance with Pa.R.A.P. 126 in 

civil proceedings. Thereafter, the Juvenile Court Procedural Rules Committee, the 

Orphans’ Court Procedural Rules Committee, the Criminal Procedural Rules Committee, 

and the Domestic Relations Procedural Rules Committee considered rules similar to 

Pa.R.Civ.P. 242. The Committees collectively agreed that similar rules were warranted. 

While in agreement, the Domestic Relations Procedural Rules Committee did not believe 

that further rulemaking within the rules governing family court proceedings was necessary 

given that those rules are presently contained within the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil 

Procedure. Accordingly, Pa.R.J.C.P. 138 and 1138, Pa.R.O.C.P. 1.22, and 

Pa.R.Crim.P. 102.1 have been adopted with language mirroring that of Pa.R.Civ.P. 242. 

The Minor Court Rules Committee also saw merit in maintaining consistency 

among the bodies of rules. That Committee observed that the rules governing procedure 

in magisterial district courts neither address written briefs submitted by the parties nor 

require written opinions to be issued by the magisterial district judge. Nonetheless, the 

Committee interpreted “citation” to include a verbal reference to legal authority in 

accordance with Pa.R.A.P. 126 during the parties’ arguments or by handing up an opinion 

to the magisterial district judge who may then consider the authority in rendering a 
2

decision. Accordingly, Pa.R.Civ.P.M.D.J. 242 has been adopted with language mirroring 

that of Pa.R.Civ.P. 242.

The Committee on Rules of Evidence observed that the Comment to Pa.R.E. 201 

discusses judicial notice of the law: “In determining the law applicable to a matter, the 

judge is sometimes said to take judicial notice of the law.” Id. at ¶ 2. To aid readers in 

understanding that Pennsylvania intermediate appellate court opinions may be cited, and 

therefore taken judicial notice of, the Comment to Pa.R.E. 201 was amended to include 

references to Pa.R.Civ.P. 242, Pa.R.J.C.P. 138 and 1138, Pa.R.O.C.P. 1.22, 

Pa.R.Crim.P. 102.1, and Pa.R.Civ.P.M.D.J. 242. While Pa.R.A.P. 126 now appears 

applicable to only appellate proceedings given the adoption of Pa.R.Civ.P. 242 and the 

other rules, a reference to Pa.R.A.P. 126 was included to eliminate any potential 

confusion with its omission.

The Committee also reviewed the current description of categories of adjudicative 

facts in the second sentence in the second paragraph of the Comment to Pa.R.E. 201. 

Presently, that sentence states: “Adjudicative facts are facts about the events, persons 

and places relevant to the matter before the court. See 2 McCormick, Evidence § 328 

(6th ed. 2006).”

That sentence was revised in two aspects. First, the Committee believed the 

categories of adjudicative facts stated were too limited. See 1 West's Pa. Prac., Evidence 

§ 201-2 (4th ed. 2021) (providing examples of categories that include nature, 

mathematics, science, medicine, language, words, abbreviations, times, days, and 

dates). Accordingly, the phrase, “or other subjects,” has been added to the current 

description of the categories. Of course, this category, as well as the other categories, 

must still be relevant to the case. 

Second, the Committee observed that statements in the commentary should 

reference the discussion of secondary sources of the Pennsylvania Rules of Evidence, 

when available, rather than the Federal Rules of Evidence. Therefore, the reference to 

McCormick on Evidence has been replaced with a reference to 1 West's Pa. Prac., 

Evidence §§ 201-1, 201-2 (4th ed. 2021). 

The Committees did not publish these proposals for comment because of the Civil 

Procedural Rules Committee’s prior publication and the Court’s adoption of that 

Committee’s recommendation. See 51 Pa.B. 1002 (February 27, 2021) (proposed 

Pa.R.Civ.P. 242 published for comment); 52 Pa.B. 440 (January 22, 2022) (adoption of 

Pa.R.Civ.P. 242); Pa.R.J.A. 103(a)(3) (permitting adoption of rule without prior 

publication).

These amendments become effective April 1, 2023.