In Re: Nomination Petition of Greg Paulmier for the Office of City Council Of the City of Philadelphia Democratic Primary May 2, 2007 (Concurring Opinion)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
[J-77-2007] IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA EASTERN DISTRICT IN RE: NOMINATION PETITION OF : GREG PAULMIER FOR THE OFFICE OF : CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF : PHILADELPHIA DEMOCRATIC : PRIMARY MAY 2, 2007 : : OBJECTION OF: CINDY BASS : : : PETITION OF: GREG PAULMIER : : : No. 172 EAL 2007 Appeal from the Order of the Commonwealth Court entered April 9, 2007 at No. 570 CD 2007, which affirmed the Order of the Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County, Civil Division entered on March 22, 2007 at No. 1172 March Term, 2007. SUBMITTED: APRIL 12,2007 CONCURRING OPINION MR. JUSTICE CASTILLE FILED: December 28, 2007 I join the Majority Opinion in its entirety. I do so because it adopts the position I have maintained since the Court s affirmance of the Commonwealth Court s opinion in In re Nom. Petition of Anastasio, 820 A.2d 880 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2003), aff d per curiam without opinion, 827 A.2d 373 (Pa. 2003). Specifically, today s Majority, construing the Ethics Act and the Election Code together, holds that: the fatality rule announced in Section 1104 of the Ethics Act was intended by the Legislature to bar only those candidates from the ballot who fail to file statements of financial interests or who file them in an untimely manner. Majority Slip Op. at 8. This construction is consonant with the position I set forth in my Concurring Opinion in In re Nom. Petition of Benninghoff, 852 A.2d 1182, 1192 (Pa. 2004) (Castille, J., joined by Eakin, J., concurring) ( Given the occasion for the amendment [to the Ethics Act which added the fatal defect language], I would conclude that fatal defects are limited to untimely filings. Mere defects or omissions in timely filings, such as the ones at issue here, should be subject to amendment. ) (noting agreement with Petition of Cioppa, 626 A.2d 146, 148-49 (Pa. 1993) (Opinion Announcing Judgment of Court by Nix, C.J.). I agree with the Majority that our holding today necessitates overruling and/or disapproving Anastasio and the line of cases which have relied upon its per se rule.1 I also write to note that, although the Majority approves the rationale of the Benninghoff case to the extent it recognized, where Anastasio did not, the necessity of aligning the Ethics Act and the Election Code, today s holding does not adopt Benninghoff s substantial compliance rule. The fashioning of that rule was made necessary by the effect of the unfortunate Anastasio line. The Court having eradicated the Anastasio cancer, the half-cure of Benninghoff has outlived its usefulness. 1 I have joined decisions applying Anastasio and/or Benninghoff strictly on grounds of stare decisis. See, e.g., In Re Nom. Petition of Littlepage, 909 A.2d 1235 (Pa. 2006). Accord id. at 1241 (Eakin, J., concurring). While stare decisis serves invaluable and salutary principles, it is not an inexorable command to be followed blindly when such adherence leads to perpetuating error. See Mayle [v. Pa. Dept. of Highways], 388 A.2d [709,] 720 [(Pa. 1978) ( [T]he doctrine of stare decisis is not a vehicle for perpetuating error, but rather a legal concept which responds to the demands of justice and, thus, permits the orderly growth processes of the law to flourish. ). Stilp v. Commonwealth, 905 A.2d 918, 967(Pa. 2006). The experience of the last few election cycles, where it became apparent that the Anastasio approach had become a potent political weapon, resulting in the courts being inundated with election challenges premised upon supposed fatal defects, and candidates being removed for a variety of minor perceived infractions, reaffirmed my belief that such was not the General Assembly s intention and that Anastasio, which was affirmed by this Court without explanation, required revisiting. [J-77-2007] - 2
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
