In Re Merlo
2011 Pa. Jud. Disc. LEXIS 10
| Ct. Jud. Disc. Pa | 2011Background
- Board filed seven-count complaint alleging chronic lateness, absences, and mismanagement of duties by Merlo; extensive trial evidence supported by staff and school district witnesses.
- Merlo served as Magisterial District Judge for 31-1-02 in Allentown; evidence showed 116 no-shows and 49 vacation days between 9/12/2007 and 12/15/2009.
- Staff testified that backlogs, failed to sign warrants, and delayed truancy and landlord/tenant proceedings disrupted court operations.
- No-show truancies and delayed adjudications harmed school district operations and student attendance enforcement.
- Respondent campaigns during work hours, prioritizing election duties over judicial responsibilities; court administrator and president judge attempted corrective measures.
- Court concluded conduct violated multiple rules and the Pennsylvania Constitution, justifying removal from office.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether chronic lateness and absences violated Rule 3A. | Board: yes; neglect of duties. | Merlo: campaign and other duties impeded but not intentional neglect. | Yes; violated Rule 3A and Art. V, §18(d)(1). |
| Whether lateness/absences violated Rule 4C. | Board: demeanour and disrespect to litigants violated 4C. | Merlo: routine court pressures; no deliberate disrespect. | Yes; conduct brought judiciary into disrepute. |
| Whether failure to diligently discharge admin responsibilities violated Rule 5A. | Board: backlog and failure to sign obstruct court admin. | Merlo: attended to duties when present; canceled due to campaign. | Yes; violated Rule 5A. |
| Whether truancy case handling violated Rule 3A/Art. 18(d)(1). | Board: repeated continuances and no-shows undermined enforcement. | Merlo: efforts balancing second chances; not persuasive. | Yes; violated Rule 3A and Art. 18(d)(1). |
| Whether landlord/tenant duties violated Rule 4A/4C. | Board: failure to hold hearings; backlogged papers and signings. | Merlo: staff followed standing instructions; some circumstances contested. | Yes for Rule 4A; evidence supported violation; 4C findings preserved. |
Key Cases Cited
- In re Lokuta, 964 A.2d 988 (Pa.Ct.Jud.Disc. 2008) (late arrivals and absences can bring disrepute to the judiciary)
- In re Trkula, 699 A.2d 3 (Pa.Ct.Jud.Disc. 1997) (precedent on disrepute standard and case-by-case analysis)
- In re Smith, 687 A.2d 1229 (Pa.Ct.Jud.Disc. 1996) (disrepute standard and public expectations of judicial conduct)
- In re Cicchetti, 743 A.2d 431 (Pa. 2000) (case-by-case assessment for judicial conduct bringing office into disrepute)