J. Schwartz v. County of Delaware, 1497-1510 C.D. 2023

Background

Multiple pro se petitioners (Appellants) sought to open ballot boxes and recanvass voting machines in Delaware County for the 2023 Municipal Election, filing 14 consolidated petitions in Court of Common Pleas.
They did not allege specific acts of fraud or error, but instead cited provisions of the Pennsylvania Election Code for the right to a recount or recanvass upon petition by electors.
The petitions requested broad access to ballots, records, ballots envelopes, poll books, and digital records, including from a centralized counting center.
Delaware County Bureau of Elections (Bureau) filed preliminary objections, arguing Appellants failed to comply with statutory requirements: they neither filed petitions for every affected election district nor supplied evidence of fraud or error.
Common Pleas sustained the Bureau’s objections and dismissed the petitions with prejudice. On appeal, Appellants argued for a broader, less technical reading of the recount statutes and claimed constitutional violations.
The Bureau requested the appellate court impose attorney fees and costs, arguing the appeal was frivolous.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Must petitions to open ballot boxes/recanvass machines be filed in every district, or is general suspicion sufficient?	Schwartz argued the Election Code does not require petitions for every district or evidence of specific fraud, citing right-to-petition language.	Bureau argued Section 1703 requires petitions in each district for a full recount, unless evidence of specific, localized fraud or error is presented.	The court held petitioners must file in every district or offer evidence of specific fraud or error; general suspicion is not enough.
Can pro se filings be excused from technical statutory compliance?	Schwartz argued pro se filings should be liberally construed and not dismissed for technicalities.	Bureau argued statutory prerequisites apply equally to all petitioners.	The court held statutory requirements apply regardless of pro se status.
Does denying the petitions infringe equal voting rights under the U.S. Constitution?	Schwartz argued dismissal of petitions violates the right to a fair, equal vote under the Constitution, preempting state law.	Bureau argued statutory recount procedures are designed to protect equality and integrity of the vote.	The court held the procedures are constitutionally permissible, ensuring equal counting of votes.
Is the appeal frivolous and are attorney fees/costs warranted?	Schwartz argued their claims have merit and raise public interest questions.	Bureau sought fees, arguing the appeal is clearly foreclosed by settled precedent.	The court held the appeal was not frivolous, denying attorney fees and costs.

Key Cases Cited

In re: Recount of Berks County General Election of November 8, 2022, 296 A.3d 64 (Pa. Cmwlth.) (concluding petitioners must file in every district or provide evidence of specific fraud or error for a recount; affirmed by Pa. Supreme Court)
In re: Petitions to Open Ballot Boxes Pursuant to 25 P.S. §3261(A), 295 A.3d 325 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2023) (outlining standard for appeals involving statutory construction in election cases)