In Re Harrington, 899 A.2d 1120

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

AND NOW, this 22nd day of June, 2006, the Order of the Court of Judicial Discipline is AFFIRMED on the basis of the finding of a violation of Pa. Const, art. V, § 18(d)(1) (authoriz ing suspension, removal from office, or other discipline for, inter alia, “conduct which ... brings the judicial office into disrepute, whether or not the conduct occurred while acting in a judicial capacity or is prohibited by law.”). However, the court’s conclusion that Appellant’s conduct violated Rule 2A of the Rules Governing Standards of Conduct of Magisterial District Judges was improper, because that conduct did not implicate the judicial decision-making process. See In re Cicchetti, 560 Pa. 183, 743 A.2d 431 (2000). Accordingly, that finding, which was not essential to the decision or order below, is disapproved.

Case Details

Case Name: In Re Harrington

Court Name: Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Date Published: Jun 22, 2006

Citations: 899 A.2d 1120; 587 Pa. 407; 2006 Pa. LEXIS 1027; Appeal 21 WAP 2005

Docket Number: Appeal 21 WAP 2005

Court Abbreviation: Pa.