Eiser v. Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp.

How later courts described this case

• holding that a voluminous Rule 1925(b) statement is not a basis for waiver when the appellant narrowed the issues in his statement of questions involved in his brief, there was no “bad faith” or “attempt to thwart the appellate process” by the appellant, and ultimately there was no “impair[ment of] meaningful appellate review.”
• stating that “while the number of issues raised in the subject Rule 1925(b) statement may have been the result of a poorly reasoned appellate strategy, because the trial court did not find that appellants acted in bad faith, there was no violation of a Rule of Appellate Procedure”
• holding that identifying twenty-four issues, in a complicated, multi-count case against many defendants that involved extensive pre-trial proceedings and a two-week trial, did not result in waiver where there was no indication that the appellant acted in bad faith
• finding that appellants had preserved their claims, despite raising 24 issues with sub-issues, because the appellants had “brought forth a complicated multi-count lawsuit with numerous defendants resulting in many trial court rulings.”

Written by the judges who cited it.