Case Name: IN RE: TRUST UNDER DEED OF David P. KULIG dated January 12, 2001. Petition of: Carrie C. Budke and James H. Kulig
Court: Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Jurisdiction: Pennsylvania
Decision Date: 2016-10-04
Citations: 158 A.3d 1234
Docket Number: No. 217 MAL 2016
Parties: IN RE: TRUST UNDER DEED OF David P. KULIG dated January 12, 2001 Petition of: Carrie C. Budke and James H. Kulig
Judges: Justices Donohue and Mundy did not participate in the consideration or decision of this matter.
Reporter: West's Atlantic Reporter, Third Series
Volume: 158
Pages: 1234–1234

Head Matter:
IN RE: TRUST UNDER DEED OF David P. KULIG dated January 12, 2001 Petition of: Carrie C. Budke and James H. Kulig
No. 217 MAL 2016
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania.
October 4, 2016

Opinion:
ORDER
PER CURIAM
AND NOW, this 4th day of October, 2016, the Petition for Alowance of Appeal is GRANTED. The issues, as stated by Petitioner, are:
a. When construing the unambiguous statute 20 Pa.C.S. § 7710.2 in a case of first impression (in this matter pertaining to the property rights of a surviving spouse), may a court resort to legislative comments while also: (a) contravening prior rulings of this Court, as well as a recent decision from the same intermediate appellate court regarding the same statutory enactment, which held that comments shall not be considered when construing an unambiguous statute, and (b) failing to consider whether the court's interpretation will lead to absurd or unreasonable results?
b. When construing the unambiguous statute 20 Pa.C.S. § 7710.2 in a case of first impression, may a court conclude that the Legislature intended to reverse longstanding laws in the absence of any clear indication on the face of the statutes, but instead based solely on implication from a legislative comment?
Justices Donohue and Mundy did not participate in the consideration or decision of this matter.