From Judgepedia

v • d • e Pennsylvania Supreme Court Current Chief: Castille • Baer • Eakin • Greenspan • McCaffrey • Melvin • Saylor • Todd Former Jones • Cappy

Pennsylvania's seven state supreme court justices are elected in partisan statewide elections to ten years terms on the court.

Interim vacancies on the court are filled by gubernatorial appointment with the consent of a supermajority vote of 2/3rds of the Pennsylvania Senate. Any interim justices so appointed must stand for election at the next municipal election that is more than ten months after the vacancy occurs; however, it is traditional for interim appointees to the state's high court to not stand for election to a permanent seat on the court.^[1]

Once a justice has first been elected to the court, he or she must run in a retention election for subsequent ten-year terms on the court.

2009 election

See also: 2009 state Supreme Court elections

When Ralph Cappy retired from the court in 2008, it created a vacancy that was filled by interim appointee Jane Cutler Greenspan. Consistent with the expected tradition on the state's high court, she is not running for a permanent seat.

The candidates

The candidates who are running in the general election are:

• Joan Orie Melvin (elected)
• Jack Panella

Melvin and Panella were in a "dead heat" according to polling firm Dane & Associates. This election determined the political balance of the Supreme Court, which was previously 3 Republicans to 3 Democrats. ^[2][3] The two debated on October 22, 2009 at an event hosted by the Pennsylvania chapter of the League of Women Voters, Pennsylvanians for Modern Courts, and the Student Bar Association of Temple University. ^[4][5] According to one reviewer the two, "answered questions about campaign contributions, recusal decisions, the Luzerne County Courthouse scandal and the role of the Supreme Court in deciding cases and administering the court system. Although the candidates agreed on several issues, their exchanges — particularly about this campaign — did become heated."^[6][7][8][9] Joan Orie Melvin ended up winning the election.^[10]

Primaries

Republicans Cheryl Lynn Allen, Joan Orie Melvin, and Paul Panepinto faced off in a Republican primary on May 19, 2009. Pennsylvania Superior Court judge Joan Orie Melvin won the Republican Primary by a wide margin as Allen finished in second, and Panepinto finished in third.

Joan Orie Melvin

Joan Orie Melvin won the Republican primary and will appear on the general election ballot November 2009.

Campaign fund-raising

Melvin reports raising $418,000 between the beginning on 2009 and September 14. Her largest single donor is the Philadelphia Trial Lawyers Association political action committee, the Committee for a Better Tomorrow, which contributed $125,000 to her and $1 million to opponent Jack Panella. ^[11][12][13]

Melvin has suggested that opponent Panella may be subject to influence from trial lawyers due to the substantial contributions they have made to his campaign - $1 million compared to the $125,000 that they have donated to her campaign. "Is it pay-to-play? Is it justice for sale? I don’t know, but it sure sounds suspect" says Melvin. ^[14]

Orie Melvin takes GOP primary

With the primary close to May 19th, the low profile race was considered to be up for grabs. The May 2, 2009 edition of the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette reported that the low profile race created some interesting factors on who could win. First, Joan Orie Melvin won the support of the Pennsylvania Republican Party and given her past electoral performance was considered a essential to winning the primary^[15]. Also, Madam Superior Judge Cheryl Lynn Allen was considered to be the possible spoiler in which election experts thought that Allen and Orie Melvin could be drawn in an electoral battle in Central and Western Pennsylvania as both Superior Judges Orie Melvin and Allen are based out of Pittsburgh^[15]. Also, Allen won a Superior Court bid in 2007 without winning the endorsement of the Pennsylvania Republican Party^[15]. Also, some media in Pennsylvania considered Paul Panepinto a wild card being the only Republican primary candidate from Eastern Pennsylvania and was considered to have a large geographical edge because of the large amount of Republican voters in the City of Philadelphia and the four nearby large suburban counties was considered over the possibility that Orie Melvin and Allen would be in battle to split the ticket for Central and Western Pennsylvania which were considered strengths for the Allen and Orie Melvin campaigns^[15].

Jane Orie senate run

Jane Orie, the sister of Judge Orie Melvin, dealt with a possible distraction that her sister could challenge former US Congressman Pat Toomey for the Republican ticket in the 2010 US Senate race.

However, Jane Orie expressed serious concerns that if she challenged Toomey that it would hurt her sister's judicial bid as Judge Orie Melvin's sister feared that some Republicans may vote against her^[16].

On July 13, 2009, Jane Orie announced that she would not challenge Pat Toomey in the Republican primary. Orie was considered a candidate after incumbent Arlen Specter switched from being Republican to Democrat^[17].

Jack Panella

Jack Panella won the Democratic primary and will appear on the general election ballot November 2009.

Campaign fund-raising

Between September 14 and the end of October, 2009, Panella received an additional $500,000 from the Committee for a Better Tomorrow, the political action committee maintained by the Philadelphia trial bar attorneys, which brought total contributions from the group to $1 million. ^[18]

Panella reports raising $1.17 million from the beginning of 2009 through September 14. His largest contributors are organized labor and trial lawyers ^[19] with his biggest single donation of $500,000 coming from the Committee for a Better Tomorrow. ^[20]

Opponent Melvin has suggested that Panella may be subject to influence from trial lawyers due to the substantial contributions they have made to his campaign - $1 million compared to the $125,000 that they have donated to her campaign. "Is it pay-to-play? Is it justice for sale? I don’t know, but it sure sounds suspect" says Melvin. ^[21]

Endorsement battle

As the battle heats up in the general election for the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, there has been no clear cut favorite to win the election and this has been evidence by the endorsements. Judge Orie Melvin has received the endorsement of the Pennsylvania State Education Association, the largest teacher's union in Pennsylvania. Also, the judge has received the endorsement of the Pennsylvania Correctional Officers Association and the Pennsylvania State Troopers Association demonstrating her broad support with law enforcement. Orie Melvin's endorsement of the largest teacher's union in Pennsylvania is considered rare with the PSEA usually endorsing a Democrat candidate^[22].

When looking at Judge Panella, the Democratic candidate has received a majority of his endorsements from unions including the Pennsylvania division of the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) and the Pennsylvania Division of AFSCME (American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees)^[23].

Republican Primary Election

Candidates tout reform credentials

All of the candidates running for the Pennsylvania Supreme Court have touted their own credentials of reform and innovation to their respective courts. Madam Superior Judge Joan Orie Melvin when she was a municipal judge in Pittsburgh and a Common Pleas judge in Allegheny County started one of the first domestic violence courts before it became a national issue and forced youthful offenders into community service to instill accountability^[24]. Philadelphia County Common Pleas judge Paul Panepinto instituted new programs aimed at intervention of youthful offenders and those who were considered deadbeat parents without putting strain on taxpayer resources^[25]. Also, Judge Panepinto has been known for reducing the case backlog in civil litigation cases in Pennsylvania's largest Common Pleas Court and also reducing the amount of cases going to trial especially medical malpractice and pharmaceutical liability cases in a city like Philadelphia which has had a reputation for having a bad civil litigation environment^{[25] [26]}. Madam Superior Judge Cheryl Lynn Allen played an integral role in speeding up the duration of juvenile court cases in Allegheny County in which prevented the need of a new juvenile justice facility being built in Pennsylvania's second largest county when she was a juvenile common pleas judge as case backlogs created overcrowding in the juvenile detention center ^[27]. Judge Allen created diversion programs to help stem the overcrowding and case backlog and saved taxpayer money in the process^[27].

Democratic candidate Jack Panella has been touted for his ability to handle complex civil litigation cases when he was a Common Pleas judge in Northhampton County^[28]. Panella was the administrative judge of a special asbestos case unit that was designed to ease the large backlog of cases especially cases involving asbestos induced injury claims that have been noted to backlog the Pennsylvania court system as there has been cases that have affected the health of blue collar workers in Pennsylvania especially those who work in the coal mining regions of Central and Western Pennsylvania where the the economy in these regions are heavily dependent on coal mining^[28]. The issue was that in many asbestos cases that it involves a larger amount of litigants than normal as it involves a lot of corporate defendants versus a small amount of plaintiffs^[28]. When then Common Pleas Judge Panella was administrative judge of this special court, Panella clustered cases together to move the cases faster than rather hearing a case one by one which has caused backlogs in the court systems as many of these cases involve the health of retired workers who had developed cancer caused by asbestos have been stuck in the court system for years^[28].

Judicial ethics

A key issued that was expressed during the primary elections was the call for ethics to improve in the Pennsylvania judicial system especially with a recent judicial corruption scandals that have affected the integrity of the courts in Pennsylvania. A theme that has been struck by the Republican candidates especially Joan Orie Melvin is on the issue of judicial ethics in the wake of the a youth detention center kickback scheme affecting Luzerne County ^[29]. Former Luzerne County Common Pleas judges Mark Ciavarella Jr. and Michael T. Conahan plead guilty on February 12, 2009 in the Middle District of Pennsylvania federal court on wire fraud and income tax fraud charges for taking more than $2.6 million dollars in kickbacks to send teenagers to two privately run youth detention centers run by Pennsylvania Child Care and a its sister company, Western Pennsylvania Child Care. The two Common Pleas judges who pleaded guilty await sentencing face more than seven years in federal prison as result of a plea deal^{[30] [31]}.

The scheme resulted as teenage offenders who had cases in front of either Judge Civarella and Conahan were given very brief hearings without attorneys and upon sentencing, these offenders were sent to camps or detention centers even for minor offenses, such as lampooning a teacher or simple assault^[30]. The Luzerene County Juvenile Law Center had raised concerns about Judge Ciavarella in the past on related conduct filed a motion to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court as officials overseeing juvenile justice claimed that about more than 500 juveniles who had appeared before the judges were given hearings without representation. The court originally rejected the petition, but recently reversed that decision^[30].

This scandal has created a hardship Pennsylvania judicial system as now convictions under the two judges will put a bigger question for prosecutors to deal with youthful offenders were convicted of more serious offenses such as car theft, drug dealing and assault. Despite the convictions, they many be thrown as some who appeared in front of the two former judges may have not been given the benefit of due process as granted in the Constitution of the United States over how Civarella and Conahan operated their courtrooms^[30].

Other than the Luzerene County scandal, Pennsylvania in the last few years has been rocked by judicial ethical scandals. These scandals include retired Pennsylvania Superior Court judge Michael Joyce who is serving a four year sentence in Federal prison over cheating an insurance company out of $440,000 while he was serving on the bench^[32].

Joyce was convicted in November of 2008 in the Western District of Pennsylvania of mail fraud and money laundering for allegedly exaggerating neck and back injuries to collect $440,000 in insurance claims stemming from a car accident in August 2001^[33]. Joyce was convicted in his role of being involved in a low-speed automobile accident in Millcreek Township on August 10, 2001 and falisfying accident records to his respective insurance company. Although, neither medical or law enforcement personnel were called to the accident scene, Joyce subsequently sought damages from State Farm, which insured the driver of the other vehicle, and his own insurer, Erie Insurance Group, for pain and suffering related to alleged injuries he received during the accident^[33].

In recent months, three common pleas judges in Philadelphia have been accused of or punished for ethical violations in recent months in violation of the Pennsylvania Code of Judicial Candons^[32]. Pennsylvania's judicial discipline is administered by both the Pennsylvania Court of Judicial Discipline and the Pennsylvania Judicial Conduct Board. Panella has been advocate for making Pennsylvania's court system more responsive to today's needs, but has not issued an official campaign position on whether to reform the double-tiered judicial discipline system in Pennsylvania.

During the Republican primary, all three of the Republican candidates made it a priority to make ethics training mandatory for all judges like Pennsylvania mandates all lawyers to undergo ethics training which is mandated by Pennsylvania laws, but however judges are not mandated to undergo ethics training.

Out of state support exposed

Close to three weeks out of the Republican primary, Common Pleas Judge Paul Panepinto who is ran as a Republican was exposed by the media in being directly linked to Texas trial attorney F. Kenneth Bailey which according to the Wall Street Journal has been a big contributor to Pennsylvania Governor Ed Rendell as reports surfaced that Rendell was allegedly involved in a quid pro quo scheme with the nationally known Texas attorney. According to Official Pennsylvania campaign finance reports in 2007, Panepinto received $50,000 from Bailey^[34].

Panepinto's involvement came to light when the Wall Street Journal, on April 8, 2009 exposed the Texas trial lawyer and indirectly linked Judge Panepinto to the wealthy Texas lawyer in the unrelated case of Commonwealth of Pennsylvania v. Janssen Pharmaceuticals in which Panepinto did not preside over^[35]. Also, in the same report the Wall Street Journal published, Bailey's Houston based law firm of Bailey, Perrin & Bailey was engaged in negotiations with Pennsylvania Governor Ed Rendell's Office of General Counsel on what was reported a potentially lucrative no-bid contract while at the same time Mr. Bailey was making repeated campaign contributions totaling more than $90,000 to the Democratic Governor's 2006 re-election bid and later donating money to the Panepinto campaign at the same time as a payback in a previous case that Bailey's law firm won in the 2005 case of Paul, Karucian, et.al v. Wyeth Pharmaceuticals which was a high profile case over the dietary drug Fen-Phen^[36].

Panepinto was the judge in the case as two women sued Wyeth as the once popular dietary drug now pulled off the market claimed that they developed valvular heart disease according to affidavits filed in the court^[36]. The case was noted to end in controversy in which attorneys representing Wyeth tried to declare a mistrial as the $200 million dollar verdict was too excessive and was ten times over what was ruled in previous cases linking up to the 2005 case^[36]. This case happened as these women who sued Wyeth opted out of a $3.75 billion dollar class action nationwide verdict rendered before the trial^[36].

Candidates square off in debate

On May 6, 2009 all three Republican Candidates, Joan Orie Melvin, Cheryl Lynn Allen, and Paul Panepinto along with Democrat Jack Panella will square off in a debate sponsored by the League of Women Voters and Pennsylvanians for Modern Courts^[37].

The was televised by PCN (Pennsylvania Cable Network) as the Debate was held in Harrisburg. To watch archived video of the debate CLICK HERE

Calls for commission-based selection come

The Philadelphia Inquirer in its May 8, 2009 edition when endorsing candidates for all levels in the Pennsylvania judicial system had made a call for Pennsylvania to switch to commission-based selection under the guise of the Missouri Plan joining media in Wisconsin as the second state to call for a change in judicial selection from elective to commission-based selection^[38].

In its editorial, the largest newspaper in the State of Pennsylvania stated in its support for Commission-based selection:

When voters size up the 33 candidates seeking nomination for 11 Philadelphia judgeships in the May 19 primary, they may well apply the usual uninformed criteria that often decide these races: candidates' names, gender, ethnicity, party backing, ballot position, slogan, or advertisements.

Trouble is, those factors have little to do with candidates' qualifications to sit in judgment on either Common Pleas Court or Municipal Court. Add the fact that these candidates have to fund-raise among lawyers who appear before them in court, and the system's flaws are obvious.

The flawed election process strengthens the case for switching to merit-based judicial appointments, with voters' getting a say through retention elections.

For now, voters have the first and last word on 10-year posts that, respectively, pay $158,000 and $153,000 a year.^[38]

See also

• Judicial selection in Pennsylvania

References

v • d • e Partisan and non-partisan elections of state Supreme Court justices Alabama elections • Arkansas elections • Georgia elections • Idaho elections • Illinois elections • Kentucky elections • Louisiana elections • Michigan elections • Minnesota elections • Mississippi elections • Montana elections • Nevada elections • New Mexico elections • North Carolina elections • North Dakota elections • Ohio elections • Oregon elections • Pennsylvania elections • Texas elections • Washington elections • West Virginia Supreme Court elections • Wisconsin elections 2010 elections • 2009 results • 2009 elections • 2008 elections • 2008 results