Section 1732. Application for Stay or Injunction Pending Appeal

(a) Application to lower court.—Application for a stay of an order of a lower court pending appeal, or for approval of or modification of the terms of any supersedeas, or for an order suspending, modifying, restoring or granting an injunction during the pendency of an appeal, or for relief in the nature of peremptory mandamus, must ordinarily be made in the first instance to the lower court, except where a prior order under this chapter has been entered in the matter by the appellate court or a judge thereof.

(b) Contents of application for stay.—An application for stay of an order of a lower court pending appeal, or for approval of or modification of the terms of any supersedeas, or for an order suspending, modifying, restoring or granting an injunction during the pendency of an appeal, or for relief in the nature of peremptory mandamus, may be made to the appellate court or to a judge thereof, but the application shall show that application to the lower court for the relief sought is not practicable, or that the lower court has denied an application, or has failed to afford the relief which the applicant requested, with the reasons given by the lower court for its action. The application shall also show the reasons for the relief requested and the facts relied upon, and if the facts are subject to dispute the application shall be supported by sworn or verified statements or copies thereof. With the application shall be filed such parts of the record as are relevant. Where practicable, the application should be accompanied by the briefs, if any, used in the lower court.

(c) Number of copies.—Seven copies of applications under this rule in the Supreme Court or the Superior Court, and three copies of applications under this rule in the Commonwealth Court, shall be filed with the original.

Official Note

The subject matter of this rule was covered by former Supreme Court Rule 62, former Superior Court Rule 53, and former Commonwealth Court Rule 112. The flat seven day period for answer of former Supreme Court Rule 62 (which presumably was principally directed at allocatur practice) has been omitted in favor of the more flexible provisions of Rule 123(b).

The provisions of this Rule 1732 amended September 10, 2008, effective December 1, 2008, 38 Pa.B. 5257. Immediately preceding text appears at serial page (315520).