Case Name: Louis and Jacqueline TUCKER, h/w and Christina Tucker, by her Parents and Guardians, Louis and Jacqueline Tucker, Petitioners v. R.M. TOURS a/k/a Richard Moss Tours, Ltd. a/k/a Richard Moss Travel and Tour Agency and Apple Vacations and Leisure Travel & Tours Co., Ltd., Respondents
Court: Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Jurisdiction: Pennsylvania
Decision Date: 2008-10-08
Citations: 598 Pa. 543
Docket Number: Appeal No. 123 EAL 2008
Parties: Louis and Jacqueline TUCKER, h/w and Christina Tucker, by her Parents and Guardians, Louis and Jacqueline Tucker, Petitioners v. R.M. TOURS a/k/a Richard Moss Tours, Ltd. a/k/a Richard Moss Travel and Tour Agency and Apple Vacations and Leisure Travel & Tours Co., Ltd., Respondents.
Judges: 
Reporter: Pennsylvania State Reports
Volume: 598
Pages: 543–543

Head Matter:
958 A.2d 496
Louis and Jacqueline TUCKER, h/w and Christina Tucker, by her Parents and Guardians, Louis and Jacqueline Tucker, Petitioners v. R.M. TOURS a/k/a Richard Moss Tours, Ltd. a/k/a Richard Moss Travel and Tour Agency and Apple Vacations and Leisure Travel & Tours Co., Ltd., Respondents.
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania.
Oct. 8, 2008.

Opinion:
ORDER
PER CURIAM.
AND NOW, this 8th day of October, 2008, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is GRANTED, LIMITED TO the issue set forth below. Allocatur is DENIED as to all remaining issues. The issue, rephrased for clarity, is:
May a trial court that has received a timely but unclear Statement of Errors Complained of on Appeal request a second, clearer Statement?