K.B. v. D.A.P. ( 2021 )

J-S30012-21
NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P. 65.37
K.B. : IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF
: PENNSYLVANIA
:
v. :
:
:
D.A.P. :
:
Appellant : No. 598 MDA 2021
Appeal from the Order Entered April 19, 2021
In the Court of Common Pleas of Berks County Domestic Relations at
No(s): 16DR00710
BEFORE: BENDER, P.J.E., McCAFFERY, J., and COLINS, J.*
MEMORANDUM BY BENDER, P.J.E.: FILED OCTOBER 12, 2021
D.A.P. (Father) appeals pro se from the trial court’s April 19, 2021 order
that denied his exceptions filed in response to the support master’s report and
recommendation, which required him to pay to K.B. (Mother) monthly child
support for K.V.P. (born in May of 2011), the parties’ child. For the reasons
that follow, we quash Father’s appeal.
We begin by pointing out that Father’s brief consists of seven pages that
include only a statement of the case, a summary of the argument, and a
conclusion. The rest of Father’s brief and his reply brief contain copies of the
trial court’s and the hearing officer’s orders and decisions and Mother’s
memorandum arguing against Father’s exceptions. Rule of Appellate
Procedure 2101 states:
____________________________________________
* Retired Senior Judge assigned to the Superior Court.
J-S30012-21
Briefs and reproduced records shall conform in all material
respects with the requirements of these rules nearly as the
circumstances of the particular case will admit, otherwise, they
may be suppressed, and, if the defects are in the brief or
reproduced record of the appellant and are substantial, the appeal
or other matter may be quashed or dismissed.
Pa.R.A.P. 2101 (“Conformance with Requirements”). We further note that
Pa.R.A.P. 2111 (“Brief of the Appellant”) contains a list of twelve separate
sections that are to be included in an appellant’s brief. Father here has not
included most of the enumerated items. Most notably, Father does not
identify the issues he wishes us to review, that is, he has failed to include a
statement of issues involved. See Pa.R.A.P. 2116 (Statement of Questions
Involved”).1 Nor does Father provide citations to any authorities. See
Pa.R.A.P. 2119(a), (b). In short, we decline to become Father’s counsel. See
Commonwealth v. Sneddon, 738 A.2d 1026, 1028 (Pa. Super. 1999).
“When issues are not properly raised and developed in briefs, when the briefs
are wholly inadequate to present specific issues for review, a court will not
consider the merits thereof.” Commonwealth v. Sanford, 445 A.2d 149,
____________________________________________
1 Rule 2116 provides, in pertinent part:
The statement of the questions involved must state concisely the
issues to be resolved, expressed in the terms and circumstances
of the case but without unnecessary detail. … No question will be
considered unless it is stated in the statement of questions
involved or is fairly suggested thereby.
Pa.R.A.P. 2116(a) (emphasis added).
-2-
J-S30012-21
150 (Pa. Super. 1982); see also Commonwealth v. Fetter, 770 A.2d 762(Pa. Super. 2001) (same). Thus, having failed to properly raise and address
any issues in his brief, Father has precluded our review of his substantive
claims. They have been waived for purposes of appeal.2 Accordingly, the
appeal must be quashed.
Appeal quashed.
Judgment Entered.
Joseph D. Seletyn, Esq.
Prothonotary
Date: 10/12/2021
____________________________________________
2 Father’s “pro se status does not entitle [him] to any particular advantage
because of his … lack of legal training.” First Union Mortg. Corp. v.
Frempong, 744 A.2d 327, 333 (Pa. Super. 1999).
-3-