Jenn-Ching Luo v. Lowe's Home Centers, LLC, et al.

After the appeal had been briefed and submitted to a three-judge panel for a review, Pennsylvania Superior Court refused to review the appeal and dismissed it by determining appellant's argument failed to conform to rule requirements. However, the Court's determination is not defects in rule compliance, but disagreement about pleading which offends conscience of the society, for an example, the court dismissed Petitioner's appeal because judge disagrees the number of argument points. Further, Pennsylvania Superior Court's conduct also differs from other appellate courts. When an appellant's brief is found defective, other appellate courts do not dismiss the appeal, but give appellant an opportunity to cure the deficiencies. This petition presents the following two questions^

1. Under the protection of due process of law, whether Pennsylvania Superior Court can dismiss Petitioner's appeal by the reasons that (l) the panel disagreed the number of argument points, (2) Petitioner did not comply with two inapplicable conditional rules, and (3) the panel disagreed 4 of 53 citations of legal authority?

2. Whether Pennsylvania Superior Court could dismiss the appeal without giving Petitioner an opportunity to cure his defective brief?