M.D. Appeal Dkt.

121 2014

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA MIDDLE DISTRICT RALPH GILBERT, GLORIA GILBERT, : No. 358 MAL 2014 MICHELLE TORGERSON, EDWIN : TORGERSON, MELDA BITTORF, : BEVERLY COX, WILLIAM COX, : Petition for Allowance of Appeal from the KIMBERLY MILES, CLEA FOCKLER, : Order of the Superior Court JOHN FOCKLER, LINDA ECKERT, : SCOTT ECKERT, WILLIAM STRINE, : KENNY JASINSKI, DENNIS JASINSKI,: KATHRYN JASINSKI, JOSEPH : JASINSKI, PATRICIA UNVERZAGT, : MEGAN JACOBS, BARBARA : UNVERZAGT, DONNA PARR, JEFF : FODEL, WENDY FODEL, JENNIFER : JASINSKI, JOHN JASINSKI, JUDY : QUEITZSCH, JEAN FRY, RICK : MCSHERRY, JOHN FREESE, DONNA : LYNN FREESE, JEFF VAN VOORHIS, : SUSAN LEE FOX, TERRENCE : FANCHER AND DONNA FANCHER, : : Respondents : : v. : : SYNAGRO CENTRAL, LLC, SYNAGRO : MID-ATLANTIC, GEORGE PHILLIPS, : HILLTOP FARMS AND STEVE TROYER, : : Petitioners : ORDER PER CURIAM AND NOW, this 9th day of October, 2014, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is GRANTED. The issue is: Did the Superior Court incorrectly interpret the Pennsylvania [RTFA] by requiring a jury trial to determine that the land application of biosolids falls within the Act’s definition of a “normal agricultural operation,” which was contrary to the Act and this Court’s precedent that statutes of repose and statutory interpretation present questions of law for resolution by courts, not juries?