In Re Nomination Petition of Farnese
17 A.3d 375
| Pa. | 2011Background
- Farnese, Jr. filed a nomination petition for the Democratic primary for state senator, with 1778 signatures required to be valid.
- Objectors challenged validity on multiple grounds; Farnese withdrew 934 signatures and another 143 were stipulations of invalidity, leaving disputed pages.
- Commonwealth Court denied the petition to set aside; Farnese briefly remained on the ballot after expedited Supreme Court per curiam order on April 8, 2008.
- The Supreme Court issued an Opinion in Support of Per Curiam Order addressing whether allegations of fraud in signature procurement are material to the petition's validity.
- The objectors pressed a 'pattern of fraud' theory and sought to use withdrawn pages to impugn non-withdrawn pages; evidentiary rulings focused on circulator affidavits and page-by-page validity.
- The Court held that allegations and evidence of fraud may be material to petition validity, but rejected reliance on the objectors' broad pattern-of-fraud theory as applied to this case.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether pattern of fraud evidence is material to nomination petitions. | Olkowski/Paylor: pattern evidence supports invalidating signatures. | Farnese: pattern evidence is immaterial under existing law. | Fraud evidence may be material; but not proven here. |
| Whether withdrawn signatures can be used to invalidate non-withdrawn signatures. | Withdrawn pages show pervasive fraud that taints other pages by same circulators. | Non-withdrawn pages are independent; withdrawn pages cannot invalidate others. | Non-withdrawn pages not invalidated solely by withdrawn ones; petition affirmed. |
Key Cases Cited
- In re Nomination Petition of Flaherty, 564 Pa. 671 (2001) (signature-by-signature validity of circulator affidavits; the circulator presence matters)
- In re Nomination of Driscoll, 577 Pa. 501 (2004) (false affidavit may void petition if knowingly falsified with intent to deceive)
- In re Payton, 596 Pa. 469 (2008) (false-in-one, false-in-all theory; per curiam holding on electon challenge evidence)
- In re Nomination Petition of Nader, 580 Pa. 134 (2004) (extensive fraud findings in signature collection; misuse of pattern theory)
- Citizens Committee to Recall Rizzo v. Bd. of Elections, 470 Pa. 1 (1976) (importance of sworn affidavits to prevent fraud in elections)
- In re Nomination Petition of Morrison-Wesley, 946 A.2d 789 (Pa.Cmwlth. 2008) (candidacy signatures collected in excess of minimum; ballot access considerations)