Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
16 Pennsylvania opinions name it 3 courts 1982–2023 2 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Pennsylvania courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Bauman Election Contest Casegreen2 sentences2020In reaching that conclusion, the Court observed that “[m]arking a ballot is an imprecise process, the focus of which is upon the unmistakable registration of the voter's will in substantial conformity to the statutory requirements.” Id. at 799 (quoting Appeal of Gallagher, 41 A.2d 630, 632 (Pa 1945)). 2020In reaching that conclusion, the Court observed that “[m]arking a ballot is an imprecise process, the focus of which is upon the unmistakable registration of the voter's will in substantial conformity to the statutory requirements.” Id. at 799 (quoting Appeal of Gallagher, 41 A.2d 630, 632 (Pa 1945)). | 6 | 6 |
Beynon Appealgreen2 sentences2023See In re Nomination Petition of Stuski, 697 A.2d 235 , 238 n.7 (Pa. 1995); Appeal of Beynon, 88 A.2d 789, 792 (Pa. 1952); In re Nomination Paper of Rogers, 13 908 A.2d 942 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2006) (Colins, J.) (single-judge op.); In re Nomination Petition of Delle Donne, 779 A.2d 1, 4 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2001) (Doyle, J.) (single-judge op.). 2006Most significant among those cases is Appeal of Beynon, 3 70 Pa. 532 , 538, 88 A.2d 789, 792 (1952), also cited by the Objectors here, which stands for the proposition that, as long as an objector has challenged signatures on a nomination paper, the objector is not precluded, after the seven-day period, from seeking to advance a challenge to those signatures on other grounds in the Election Code at the hearing on a petition to set aside the nomination petition. | 2 | 2 |
Stuski v. Lauergreen1 sentence2023See In re Nomination Petition of Stuski, 697 A.2d 235 , 238 n.7 (Pa. 1995); Appeal of Beynon, 88 A.2d 789, 792 (Pa. 1952); In re Nomination Paper of Rogers, 13 908 A.2d 942 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2006) (Colins, J.) (single-judge op.); In re Nomination Petition of Delle Donne, 779 A.2d 1, 4 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2001) (Doyle, J.) (single-judge op.). | 1 | 1 |
In Re Nomination Petition of Delle Donnegreen1 sentence2023See In re Nomination Petition of Stuski, 697 A.2d 235 , 238 n.7 (Pa. 1995); Appeal of Beynon, 88 A.2d 789, 792 (Pa. 1952); In re Nomination Paper of Rogers, 13 908 A.2d 942 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2006) (Colins, J.) (single-judge op.); In re Nomination Petition of Delle Donne, 779 A.2d 1, 4 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2001) (Doyle, J.) (single-judge op.). | 1 | 1 |
Valley Township v. City of Coatesvillegreen1 sentence2022Dicta has no precedential value.’ Valley Twp. v. City of Coatesville, 894 A.2d 885, 889 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2006).” Castellani v. Scranton Times, L.P., 124 A.3d 1229 , 1243 n.11 (Pa. 2015). 9 This Court has observed: The short time allowed under Section 977 of the Election Code for the hearing and disposition of challenges to nomination petitions suggests that persons whose [nomination] petitions are challenged should be quickly and surely notified. | 1 | 1 |
In Re Petition to Contest the General Election for District Justicegreen2 sentences2004See In re Petition to Contest the General Election for District Justice in Judicial District 36-3-03 Nunc Pro Tunc, 543 Pa. 216 , 670 A.2d 629 (1996). 2004See In re Petition to Contest the General Election for District Justice in Judicial District 36-3-03 Nunc Pro Tunc, 543 Pa. 216 , 670 A.2d 629 (1996). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Pennsylvania. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
In Re Canvass of Absentee Ballots of Nov. 4, 2003 General Election
green
2 sentences2020Election, Appeal of John Pierce, 843 A.2d 1223 (Pa. 2004). [J-118A-2020, J-118B-2020, J-118C-2020, J-118D-2020, J-118E-2020 and J-118F- 2020] - 20 In Shambach, the Court declined to invalidate a write-in vote cast for a candidate who was named on the ballot, in direct violation of the Election Code’s instruction that a voter could only write in a person’s name if the name of said individual was “not already printed on the ballot for that office.” Shambach, 845 A.2d at 795 . 2020Election, Appeal of John Pierce, 843 A.2d 1223 (Pa. 2004). [J-118A-2020, J-118B-2020, J-118C-2020, J-118D-2020, J-118E-2020 and J-118F- 2020] - 20 In Shambach, the Court declined to invalidate a write-in vote cast for a candidate who was named on the ballot, in direct violation of the Election Code’s instruction that a voter could only write in a person’s name if the name of said individual was “not already printed on the ballot for that office.” Shambach, 845 A.2d at 795 . | 6 | 2020–2020 |
Gordon v. Philadelphia County Democratic Executive Committee
green
2 sentences2019Committee, 80 A.3d 464 (Pa. Super. 2013), wherein a three-Judge panel of this Court determined that it had jurisdiction over an J-E01003-19 appeal involving an alleged Election Code violation. 2019Committee, 80 A.3d 464 (Pa. Super. 2013), wherein a three-Judge panel of this Court determined that it had jurisdiction over an J-E01003-19 appeal involving an alleged Election Code violation. | 2 | 2019–2019 |
Commonwealth v. Bidner
red
2 sentences1984In Commonwealth v. Bidner, 282 Pa. Superior Ct. 100 , 422 A.2d 847 (1980), the Superior Court, speaking through Judge Hester, ruled that “the clear intent of the legislature by virtue of § 107(a) 9 ,” 282 Pa.Superior Ct. at 114, 422 A.2d at 854 , authorized the application of the Crimes Code statute of limitations, 18 Pa.C.S.A. § 108, 10 to an election code violation which was perpetrated after the effective date of the Crimes Code. 1984In Commonwealth v. Bidner, 282 Pa. Superior Ct. 100 , 422 A.2d 847 (1980), the Superior Court, speaking through Judge Hester, ruled that “the clear intent of the legislature by virtue of § 107(a) 9 ,” 282 Pa.Superior Ct. at 114, 422 A.2d at 854 , authorized the application of the Crimes Code statute of limitations, 18 Pa.C.S.A. § 108, 10 to an election code violation which was perpetrated after the effective date of the Crimes Code. | 2 | 1982–1984 |
In re Nomination Paper of Rogers
green
1 sentence2023See In re Nomination Petition of Stuski, 697 A.2d 235 , 238 n.7 (Pa. 1995); Appeal of Beynon, 88 A.2d 789, 792 (Pa. 1952); In re Nomination Paper of Rogers, 13 908 A.2d 942 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2006) (Colins, J.) (single-judge op.); In re Nomination Petition of Delle Donne, 779 A.2d 1, 4 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2001) (Doyle, J.) (single-judge op.). | 1 | 2023–2023 |
Castellani, R., Aplts. v. Scranton Times
green
1 sentence2022Dicta has no precedential value.’ Valley Twp. v. City of Coatesville, 894 A.2d 885, 889 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2006).” Castellani v. Scranton Times, L.P., 124 A.3d 1229 , 1243 n.11 (Pa. 2015). 9 This Court has observed: The short time allowed under Section 977 of the Election Code for the hearing and disposition of challenges to nomination petitions suggests that persons whose [nomination] petitions are challenged should be quickly and surely notified. | 1 | 2022–2022 |
In Re Audit of Campaign Expenses, Statements, Election Reports, & Affidavits Required to Be Filed With the Northampton County Election Board
green
2 sentences2014In re Audit of Campaign Expenses, 747 A.2d 1262 (Pa. Cmwlth.2000) (candidate’s failure to report postcard printing expenditures while attempting to get the invoice and later rectified the exclusion was not substantial); see also Radich v. Habay (Pa. Cmwlth. 2014In re Audit of Campaign Expenses, 747 A.2d 1262 (Pa. Cmwlth.2000) (candidate’s failure to report postcard printing expenditures while attempting to get the invoice and later rectified the exclusion was not substantial); see also Radich v. Habay (Pa. Cmwlth. | 1 | 2014–2014 |
Harrisburg Sunday Movie Petition Case
green
2 sentences1995Both parties cite Harrisburg Sunday Movie Petition Case, 352 Pa. 635 , 44 A.2d 46 (1945), which involved petitions seeking to have a question regarding Sunday motion picture shows placed on the ballot. 1995Both parties cite Harrisburg Sunday Movie Petition Case, 352 Pa. 635 , 44 A.2d 46 (1945), which involved petitions seeking to have a question regarding Sunday motion picture shows placed on the ballot. | 1 | 1995–1995 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.