In Re: Nom Papers of E Scroggin Appeal of Stefano, 237 A.3d 1006

Background

The Green Party filed a 710-page nomination paper (Aug. 3, 2020) naming Elizabeth Scroggin (President) and Neal Taylor Gale (Vice President) among a five-candidate slate; the paper contained >8,500 signatures and was presented in person by the party agent.
Original, notarized affidavits were appended for several candidates, but not for Scroggin or Gale; a facsimile of Scroggin’s affidavit was later found in a Department fax/email account and no original affidavit from Scroggin has been produced.
On Aug. 10 the Green Party submitted Substitute Nomination Certificates naming Howie Hawkins and Angela Walker as replacements; the forms claimed "resignation" and that substitutions were made Aug. 2.
Objectors (Stefano & Thomas) challenged the nomination paper and the substitutions in Commonwealth Court, arguing the required candidate affidavits were not properly filed and substitutions were therefore invalid.
The Commonwealth Court accepted Scroggin’s faxed affidavit as timely and sufficient but found Walker’s substitution invalid; the Pennsylvania Supreme Court reviewed and concluded both substitutions were ineffective and ordered removal of Hawkins and Walker from the general-election ballot.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Scroggin was duly nominated where no original affidavit was appended (only a fax later located)	Scroggin’s failure to append an original, notarized affidavit to the nomination paper is a fatal statutory defect; faxing/unmonitored transmission is not compliance	Fax was transmitted before the deadline and substantial compliance (plus Department acceptance/COVID accommodations) excuses a technical defect	Court held strict compliance required; facsimile was insufficient and Scroggin was not duly nominated
Whether Howie Hawkins’ substitution was valid	Substitution is a nullity if the original nominee was not duly nominated; Hawkins’ affidavit could not cure the missing original for Scroggin	Commonwealth Court: Scroggin’s fax satisfied filing so substitution of Hawkins was effective	Court reversed Commonwealth Court: Hawkins’ substitution was invalid and Hawkins must be removed
Whether Angela Walker’s substitution (replacing Gale) was valid given absence of any proper Gale affidavit	Gale had no valid affidavit appended; therefore Walker’s substitution was invalid	Candidates offered no persuasive defense; Commonwealth Court had already found Walker’s substitution invalid	Court affirmed removal of Walker (substitution invalid)
Whether Department acceptance, delay, or COVID-era practices estop challenges or permit equitable cure	Department acceptance or staff error does not cure statutory noncompliance; objectors retain right to timely challenge	Defendants argued Department practices, acceptance, and equitable considerations (protect franchise) support relief	Court held Department inaction or unofficial guidance does not excuse failure to follow mandatory statutory filing rules; strict enforcement required

Key Cases Cited

Cianfrani, 359 A.2d 383 (Pa. 1976) (affidavit requirement is substantive and failure to append is fatal)
Kloiber, 362 A.2d 484 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1976) (court may allow nunc pro tunc amendment for improperly completed affidavits upon due diligence)
Barr, 956 A.2d 1083 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2008) (substitution requires a valid initial nomination)
Brown v. Finnegan, 133 A.2d 809 (Pa. 1957) (failure to file an affidavit in conformity with the Code prevents ballot placement)
Steel, 105 A.2d 139 (Pa. 1954) (use of "shall" in Election Code is mandatory, not directory)
Appeal of Pierce, 843 A.2d 1223 (Pa. 2004) (election formalities are strictly enforced to prevent fraud; erroneous guidance does not excuse noncompliance)
In re Guzzardi, 99 A.3d 381 (Pa. 2014) (miscommunication from election officials does not relieve a candidate of statutory filing duties)