Court Opinion

ID: 9746625
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-27 14:30:25.111281+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:25:15.498049
License: Public Domain

PRICE, Judge,
dissenting:
I would quash this appeal. The issue is collateral to the case-in-chief and, therefore, interlocutory. An appeal is not permitted. This principle has been established to prevent the fragmentation of appeals and the unnecessary overburdening of appellate courts on collateral issues. Pugar v. Greco, 483 Pa. 68, 394 A.2d 542 (1978), Gommer v. Kotch, 256 Pa.Super. 20, 389 A.2d 155 (1978). The majority opinion is an example of the possibility of double review by considering the merits of appellants’ collateral claim and then remanding for proceedings on the case—in-chief upon filing of proper bond.
*52Appellants were given the opportunity to post bond, continue with their appeal of the arbitration award having, preserved the issue of bond, and after a decision on the case-in-chief take an appeal raising this bond issue plus any others that arose. Appellants refused to take that proper course. Having made that election and having put themselves out of court, they should not be given this second chance.
The appeal should be quashed.
HOFFMAN, J., joins in this opinion.