In Re: Lehigh County Constables ~ Appeal of: D.C. Huber and F. Bainhauer, III
172 A.3d 712
| Pa. Commw. Ct. | 2017Background
- Lehigh County issued an Administrative Order (AD-6-2016) requiring petitions for appointment of deputy constables for elections to include constable's name/signature, proposed deputy's name/address, Chief Clerk certification that the proposed deputy is a qualified elector, and the recommendation/signature of the magisterial district judge (MDJ) and the District Attorney.
- Constables Huber and Bainhauer submitted petitions (for deputies Kern, Colon-Ortiz, and Cocco) that included the Chief Clerk certification and constable signature but lacked MDJ and District Attorney recommendations/signatures; the trial court denied those petitions.
- Separate petitions seeking appointment of Koenig and Ritter for Lynn Township (where there is no sitting constable) were submitted with Chief Clerk, MDJ, and District Attorney approvals but without a constable’s name; the trial court approved those petitions.
- The Constables appealed and sought a hearing; at the hearing they argued the MDJ-signature requirement was an unfunded mandate and impractical; they conceded the court could obtain any necessary MDJ/DA input itself.
- While the appeal was pending the trial court replaced the 2016 order with AD-6-2017, which requires only that the constable complete Section 1 (name/signature and proposed deputy) and directs the Clerk to obtain MDJ, Chief Clerk, and District Attorney inputs (Section 2).
- The Commonwealth Court vacated and remanded the trial court’s denials for reconsideration under the 2017 Administrative Order, affirmed approval of the Lynn Township appointments (issues not preserved), and denied transfer to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether this Court lacks jurisdiction and appeal must be transferred to PA Supreme Court under exclusive jurisdiction over "right to public office" | Constables moved to transfer, asserting appeal involves appointment-related rights | Trial court/others argued matter does not implicate policy-making public office jurisdiction | Denied transfer; appeal remains in Commonwealth Court because petitions did not involve public office policymaking authority (Spano guidance) |
| Whether Section 7122/ trial court procedure required constables to obtain MDJ and District Attorney signatures before filing petitions | Huber/Bainhauer argued they were not required to obtain MDJ/DA signatures pre-filing; burden is an unfunded mandate and court can obtain approvals itself | Trial court initially required MDJ/DA signatures per its 2016 Administrative Order | Vacated denials and remanded: trial court later amended procedure (AD-6-2017) to require only constable completion of Section 1 and have Clerk obtain Section 2 inputs; petitions must be reconsidered under new order |
| Whether petitions lacking a constable’s signature (Township with no constable) were invalid and should be vacated | Constables argued approvals were improper because no constable submitted petitions | Trial court approved petitions; proponents argued vacancy procedure and court appointment process authorized filings | Affirmed trial court’s approvals; issue waived on appeal because Constables did not raise it below |
Key Cases Cited
- Commonwealth v. Spano, 701 A.2d 566 (Pa. 1997) (discussing limits of Supreme Court exclusive jurisdiction over "right to public office")
- Appeal of Bowers, 269 A.2d 712 (Pa. 1970) (definition and scope of "public office" for jurisdictional purposes)
- Azzarrelli v. City of Scranton, 655 A.2d 648 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1995) (standard of review for trial court decisions)
- In re Oren, 159 A.3d 1023 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2017) (example of Commonwealth Court jurisdiction over petitions to appoint deputy constables)
- In re Fry, 110 A.3d 1103 (Pa. Cmwlth.) (precedent on appellate review of similar appointments)