Legal Opinion · Dissent

In re Nomination Petition of Guzzardi

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided May 1, 2014Published

1DissentJustice Baer

I respectfully dissent. The majority holds that Pennsylvania courts may never, under any circumstances, invoke equity, specifically nunc pro tunc principles, to excuse a candidate’s untimely filing of a statement of financial interests with the Ethics Commission because to do so would override the Legislative pronouncement in Section 1104(b)(3) of the Ethics Act that such omission “shall ... be a fatal defect to a petition to appear on the ballot.” 65 Pa.C.S. § 1104(b)(3). Adoption of such a harsh and inflexible rule runs counter to this Court’s pronouncement that the strict disclosure…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Bass v. CommonwealthSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1979
  2. Cook v. Unemployment Compensation Board of ReviewSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1996
  3. Criss v. WiseSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2001
  4. In Re Nomination of PaulmierSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2007
  5. Baranyai v. AndrezjwskiSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1993

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API