Pennsylvania Consolidated Statutes

65 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 1109 (2026)

 Penalties.

✓ current as of May 2026
Coverage note: this corpus holds the consolidated Pa.C.S. titles only. Unconsolidated P.S. statutes (UTPCPL 73 P.S. § 201-1, Liquor Code, wage payment laws) are not included; a miss here does not mean the statute does not exist. Check palegis.us.
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section PA-LEGpalegis.us JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

§ 1109.  Penalties.

(a)  Restricted activities violation.--Any person who violates the provisions of section 1103(a), (b) and (c) (relating to restricted activities) commits a felony and shall, upon conviction, be sentenced to pay a fine of not more than $10,000 or to imprisonment for not more than five years, or both.

(b)  Financial interests statement violation.--Any person who violates the provisions of section 1103(d) through (j), 1104 (relating to statement of financial interests required to be filed) or 1105(a) (relating to statement of financial interests) commits a misdemeanor and shall, upon conviction, be sentenced to pay a fine of not more than $1,000 or to imprisonment for not more than one year, or both.

(c)  Treble damages.--Any person who obtains financial gain from violating any provision of this chapter, in addition to any other penalty provided by law, shall pay a sum of money equal to three times the amount of the financial gain resulting from such violation into the State Treasury or the treasury of the political subdivision. Treble damages shall not be assessed against a person who acted in good faith reliance on the advice of legal counsel.

(d)  Impeachment and disciplinary action.--The penalties prescribed in this chapter do not limit the power of either house of the Legislature to discipline its own members or impeach a public official and do not limit the power of agencies or commissions to discipline officials or employees.

(e)  Other violations of chapter.--Any person who violates the confidentiality of a commission proceeding pursuant to section 1108 (relating to investigations by commission) commits a misdemeanor and shall, upon conviction, be sentenced to pay a fine of not more than $1,000 or to imprisonment for not more than one year, or both. Any person who engages in retaliatory activity proscribed by section 1108(j) commits a misdemeanor and, in addition to any other penalty provided by law, shall, upon conviction, be sentenced to pay a fine of not more than $1,000 or to imprisonment for not more than one year, or both. Any person who willfully affirms or swears falsely in regard to any material matter before a commission proceeding pursuant to section 1108 commits a felony and shall, upon conviction, be sentenced to pay a fine of not more than $5,000 or to imprisonment for not more than five years, or both.

(f)  Civil penalty.--In addition to any other civil remedy or criminal penalty provided for in this chapter, the commission may, after notice has been served in accordance with section 1107(5) (relating to powers and duties of commission) and upon a majority vote of its members, levy a civil penalty upon any person subject to this chapter who fails to file a statement of financial interests in a timely manner or who files a deficient statement of financial interests, at a rate of not more than $25 for each day such statement remains delinquent or deficient. The maximum penalty payable under this paragraph is $250.

(g)  Reliance on solicitor's opinion.--A public official of a political subdivision who acts in good faith reliance on a written, nonconfidential opinion of the solicitor of the political subdivision or upon an opinion of the solicitor of the political subdivision, publicly stated at an open meeting of the political subdivision and recorded in the official minutes of the meeting, shall not be subject to the penalties provided for in subsections (a) and (b) nor for the treble damages provided for in subsection (c). However, this subsection shall not apply in situations where the solicitor's opinion has been rendered under duress or where the parties seeking and rendering the solicitor's opinion have colluded to purposefully commit a violation of this chapter.

 

Cross References.  Section 1109 is referred to in section 9311 of Title 3 (Agriculture); sections 1201, 1512, 1512.1, 4302, 4303, 4304 of Title 4 (Amusements).

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 25 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 2003–2025 · leading case: Rendell v. Pennsylvania State Ethics Comm'n, 983 A.2d 708 (Pa. 2009).
Rendell v. Pennsylvania State Ethics Comm'n, 983 A.2d 708 (Pa. 2009). · cites it 2× “The procedure advocated by Justice Greenspan for achieving clarity through the courts (which are charged with the interpretation of legislative enactments) entails requiring public officials to expose themselves to ethical investigation and possible civil fines, criminal…”
Commonwealth v. Veon, 150 A.3d 435 (Pa. 2016). “But see 65 Pa.C.S. § 1109(c) (“Any person who obtains financial gain from violating any provision of [Chapter 65], in addition to any other penalty provided by law, shall pay a sum of money equal to three times the amount of the financial gain resulting from such violation into…”
United States v. Kemp, 500 F.3d 257 (3rd Cir. 2007). “See 65 Pa. Cons.Stat. § 1109(a). Thus, we also reject this claim.”
Commonwealth v. Orie, 88 A.3d 983 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2014). “48, pursuant to 65 Pa.C.S. § 1109(c) (treble damages). See Order, 7/3/2012.”
Shaulis v. Pennsylvania State Ethics Comm'n, 833 A.2d 123 (Pa. 2003). · cites it 2× “" [1] This would be the case, for example, upon any suggestion that the Legislature did not intend for a right of appeal to attach to the imposition of criminal penalties under Section 1109 of the Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. § 1109, or the award of monetary damages under Section…”
Kistler v. Commonwealth, State Ethics Comm'n, 22 A.3d 223 (Pa. 2011). · cites it 2× “Further, the Act defines all conflicts of interest to be felonies, see 65 Pa.C.S. § 1109(a), and makes no express distinction in this regard between intentional and unintentional conflicts.”
Stilp v. Contino, 743 F. Supp. 2d 460 (M.D. Penn. 2010). · cites it 3× “See 65 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 1109 (e) (“Any person who willfully affirms or swears *469 falsely in regard to any material matter before a commission proceeding pursuant to section 1108 commits a felony.”
Commonwealth v. Honore, 150 A.3d 521 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2016). · cites it 2× “Section 1109(b) of the Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. § 1109(b). In addition, the Commission may assess a civil penalty of not more than $25 a day, up to a total of $250, for the time that the statement remains delinquent.”
Barrel of Monkeys, LLC v. Allegheny Cnty., 39 A.3d 559 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2012). “65 Pa.C.S. § 1109. Under these circumstances, we concluded that under the doctrine of expressio unius est exclusio alterius, the General Assembly did not intend voiding of votes to be an unstated remedy.”
Quaglia v. State Ethics Comm'n, 986 A.2d 974 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2010). “Section 1109(b) of the Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. § 1109(b). In addition, the Commission may assess a civil penalty of not more than $25 a day, up to a total of $250, for the time that the statement remains delinquent.”
Salem Twp. Mun. Auth. v. Twp. of Salem, 820 A.2d 888 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2003). “65 Pa.C.S. § 1109. The Ethics Act, however, does not permit the Court to void the public official or employee's vote.”
In Re the Nomination Petition of Benninghoff, 847 A.2d 144 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2004). · cites it 2× “§ 1107 gives the Ethics Commission the power to file a petition to remove candidates from the ballot for filing a defective petition or as a penalty under 65 Pa.C.S. § 1109 that it can impose. It simply has been given no power, as the dissent suggests, to act as an arbiter as to…”
— 65 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 1109(a) — 8 cases
Rendell v. Pennsylvania State Ethics Comm'n, 983 A.2d 708 (Pa. 2009). “The procedure advocated by Justice Greenspan for achieving clarity through the courts (which are charged with the interpretation of legislative enactments) entails requiring public officials to expose themselves to ethical investigation and possible civil fines, criminal…”
United States v. Kemp, 500 F.3d 257 (3rd Cir. 2007). “See 65 Pa. Cons.Stat. § 1109(a). Thus, we also reject this claim.”
Kistler v. Commonwealth, State Ethics Comm'n, 22 A.3d 223 (Pa. 2011). “Further, the Act defines all conflicts of interest to be felonies, see 65 Pa.C.S. § 1109(a), and makes no express distinction in this regard between intentional and unintentional conflicts.”
Bixler v. State Ethics Comm'n, 847 A.2d 785 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2004).
D. Bloom v. PA SEC (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2019).
— 65 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 1109(b) — 3 cases
Commonwealth v. Honore, 150 A.3d 521 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2016). “Section 1109(b) of the Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. § 1109(b). In addition, the Commission may assess a civil penalty of not more than $25 a day, up to a total of $250, for the time that the statement remains delinquent.”
Quaglia v. State Ethics Comm'n, 986 A.2d 974 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2010). “Section 1109(b) of the Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. § 1109(b). In addition, the Commission may assess a civil penalty of not more than $25 a day, up to a total of $250, for the time that the statement remains delinquent.”
— 65 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 1109(c) — 4 cases
Commonwealth v. Veon, 150 A.3d 435 (Pa. 2016). “But see 65 Pa.C.S. § 1109(c) (“Any person who obtains financial gain from violating any provision of [Chapter 65], in addition to any other penalty provided by law, shall pay a sum of money equal to three times the amount of the financial gain resulting from such violation into…”
Commonwealth v. Orie, 88 A.3d 983 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2014). “48, pursuant to 65 Pa.C.S. § 1109(c) (treble damages). See Order, 7/3/2012.”
Com. v. Perzel, J. (Pa. Super. Ct. 2019).
Com. v. Deweese, H. (Pa. Super. Ct. 2020).
— 65 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 1109(d) — 1 case
Pilchesky v. Mellow, 19 A.3d 570 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2011).
— 65 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 1109(f) — 3 cases
Commonwealth v. Honore, 150 A.3d 521 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2016). “Section 1109(b) of the Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. § 1109(b). In addition, the Commission may assess a civil penalty of not more than $25 a day, up to a total of $250, for the time that the statement remains delinquent.”
V. Kean Staab v. SEC (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2025).
— 65 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 1109(g) — 2 cases
Kistler v. State Ethics Comm'n, 958 A.2d 1092 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2008).
V. Kean Staab v. SEC (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2025).
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.