In re Nomination Petition of Kerry Benninghoff (Republican) Candidate for Representative in the General Assembly from the 171st Legislative District; Appeal of Kerry Benninghoff

Summary

The Supreme Court of Pennsylvania considered whether a candidate’s failure to list the Commonwealth as a direct income source on a financial-interest statement required striking his nomination petition. The Court held that the omission was a technical defect because the statement substantially disclosed his governmental employment and income, and that the defect was amendable rather than fatal. The Court reversed the Commonwealth Court and permitted the candidate’s name to remain on the primary-election ballot.

Holdings

1. A salary paid by a governmental entity for services as a state representative is income subject to disclosure under the Ethics Act; it is not excluded as a governmentally mandated payment or benefit.
2. Where a candidate timely files a financial-interest statement and substantially complies with the Ethics Act, a technical defect apparent on the face of the statement is amendable when the required information can be obtained from the statement as a whole.

Questions Presented

1. Whether a state representative's salary from the Commonwealth is income that must be disclosed under the Public Official and Employee Ethics Act.
2. Whether a timely filed financial-interest statement that identifies the candidate's governmental employment elsewhere on the form substantially complies with the Ethics Act despite omitting the governmental source of salary from the designated income-source block.
3. Whether the omission was an amendable technical defect rather than a fatal defect requiring removal of the candidate from the ballot.

Disposition

reversed