Election Law @ Moritz Home Page

Last Updated: February 20, 2015 at 8:25 AM

Banfield v. Cortes

Case Information

Date Filed / Ended: August 15, 2006 / April 4, 2008
State: Pennsylvania
Issue: Voting Technology
Courts that Heard this Case: Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania (Case No. 442 MD 2006); Pennsylvania Supreme Court (Case No. 70 MM 2007); Pennsylvania Supreme Court (Case No. 83 MAP 2013)

Issue:

Whether Pennsylvania’s use of DREs (direct recording electronic voting machines) violates Pennsylvania or federal law; whether the Secretary of the Commonwealth is required to re-examine the electronic voting system at request of electors.

Status:

Motions for Summary Judgment filed 8/8/11 by both Petitioner and Respondent. Opinion denying petitioners' motion for partial summary judgment issued 8/29/12. Status Conference scheduled for 1/29/13. Counts 1, 4, 5, and 6 dismissed on 1/29/13. Memorandum and opinion filed 10/1/13. Notice of Appeal filed 10/11/13. Notice of Judgment in favor of respondent filed 10/15/14. Appellant's Brief filed in Supreme Court on 1/6/14. Appellee's Brief filed 2/10/14. Appellant's Reply Brief filed 2/24/14. Pennsylvania Supreme Court oral argument held 9/10/14. Opinion affirming Commonwealth Court filed 2/18/15.

Pennsylvania Supreme Court Documents

Petition for Permission to Appeal (filed 5/10/07) [Not available]
Brief in Opposition (filed 5/24/07) [Not available]
Order Denying Permission to Appeal (filed 12/16/07)
Appellant's Brief (filed 1/6/14)
Appellee's Brief (filed 2/10/14)
Appellant's Reply Brief (filed 2/24/14)
Order Granting Application for Nunc Pro Tunc Relief (filed 6/16/14)
Rutgers School of Law Amicus Curiae Brief (filed 6/27/14)
Appellee's Reply Brief to Amicus Curiae Brief (filed 7/7/14)
Oral Argument held 9/10/14
Opinion Affirming Commonwealth Court (filed 2/18/15)

Commonwealth Court Documents

Petition for Review (filed 8/15/06)
- Exhibits
Opinion (entered 4/12/07)
Application for Stay and Supersedeas of Proceedings (filed 4/20/07)
Application to Amend the 4/12/07 Order to Allow Interlocutory Appeal by Respondent (filed 4/20/07)
Petitioners' Opposition to Respondents' Application for Relief (filed 4/27/07)
Order Granting Application to Amend (entered 4/30/07)
Application for Stay of proceedings pending appeal of this Courts 4/12/2007 Order (filed 5/8/07)
Application for Relief from Paragraph 4 of this Court's April 30, 2007 Order ( filed 5/10/07)
Order Granting Application for Stay (entered 5/11/07)
Motion to Dissolve Voluntary Stay of Proceedings and for an Expedited Hearing and Memorandum of Law (filed 1/25/08)
Petition for Preliminary Injunction and Memorandum of Law (filed 1/25/08)
Answer to Application for Relief (filed 1/30/08)
Memorandum of Law Filed in Opposition to Petitioners' Motion to Dissolve Stay of Proceedings (1/30/08)
Petitioner's Reply Brief Filed in further support of their motion to dissolve the stay of proceedings (1/31/08)
Application to Strike and Memorandum in Support (2/6/08)
Motion for Pre-hearing summary denial of preliminary injunction and Memorandum in Support (2/6/08)
Answer to Petition for Preliminary Injunction (2/6/08)
Order Regarding Petition for Preliminary Injunction Other Disposition (2/8/08)
Motion to Dissolve Voluntary Stay of Proceedings and to set a Discovery and Trial Schedule (2/22/08)
Memorandum of Law in opposition to Petitioners' Motion to Dissolve Stay of Proceedings (3/7/08)
Answer to Petitioners' Motion to Dissolve Stay of Proceedings (3/7/08)
Argument Scheduled: 4/1/08 (3/10/08)
Petitioner's Reply Brief (filed 3/14/08)
Order Denying Application for Relief: The motion to dissolve voluntary stay is DENIED (entered 4/4/08)
Answer and New Matter (filed 1/15/09)
Answer to New Matter (filed 2/25/09)
Application for Relief (filed 4/8/09)
Order granting Application for Relief (filed 4/13/09)
Petitioners' Motion for Permanent Judge (filed 10/02/09)
PA's Memorandum in Support of Motion to Quash Subpoena and for Protective Order (filed 10/2/09)
Petitioners' Memorandum in Opposition to Motion to Quash (filed 10/2/09)
Douglas W. Jones Affidavit (filed 10/15/09)
Douglas W. Jones Curriculum Vitae (filed 10/15/09)
Answer to Motion to Quash (filed 11/20/09)
Petitioner's Brief (filed 11/30/09)
Order Granting Request to Intervene (entered 12/15/09)
Notice of Appeal to PA Supreme Court (filed 12/28/09)
Second Amended Pre-Trial Order (filed 5/11/10)
Third Amended Pre-Trial Order (filed 5/27/10)
Petitioner's Brief Filed (filed 7/15/11)
Motion to Compel Production of Documents (filed 7/28/11)
Motions for Summary Judgment for both Petitioners and Respondents (filed 8/8/11)
Argument and Briefing Schedule (entered 8/17/11)
Petitioners' Memorandum in Support of Summary Judgment Motion (filed 9/15/11)
Notice of Argument (filed 10/12/11)
Respondent's Memorandum in Opposition to Petitioner's Summary Judgment Motion (filed 10/14/11)
Petitioner's Reply to Respondent's Memorandum (filed 11/2/11)
Opinion Denying Partial Summary Judgment Motion (filed 8/29/12)
Joint Status Report Regarding Re-examination of DRE voting system (filed 9/13/12)
Application of Aichele for Status Conference (filed 1/4/13)
Answer to Application for Relief (filed 1/14/13)
Further Proceedings Assigned to Judge Leadbetter (filed 1/14/13)
Order Filed Dismissing Counts 1, 4, 5 and 6 (filed 1/29/13)
Answer to Motion to Compel (filed 2/5/13)
Order Granting Motion to Compel in Part (filed 2/13/13)
Motion to Compel Production of Documents by Respondent (filed 3/15/13)
Respondent's Brief in Support of Application for Relief (filed 3/21/13)
Aichele's Response to Motion to Compel (filed 4/1/13)
Application for Relief (filed 4/8/13)
Reply in Support of Motion to Compel (filed 4/10/13)
Petitioner's Opposition to Respondent's Application for Relief (filed 4/11/2013)
Intervenor's Brief (filed 4/19/13)
Order Denying Application for Relief (filed 4/19/13)
Order Granting In Camera Review (filed 4/19/13)
Respondent's Brief in Support of Summary Relief (filed 4/19/13)
Notice of Petitioner's Violation of Second Protective Order (filed 5/2/13)
Petitioners' Response to Election Systems and Software LLC's Notice (filed 5/9/13)
Order Denying Motion by Election Systems & Software, Inc (filed 5/13/13)
Election Systems LLC's Reply re Petitioners' Violation of 2nd Protective Order (filed 5/15/13)
Order Denying Petitioner's Motion to Compel as Moot (filed 10/1/13)
Memorandum and Opinion Granting Summary Relief in Counts 2, 3, 7, 9 and 10 (filed 10/1/13)
Praecipe for Entry of Judgment (filed 10/11/13)
Notice of Appeal (filed 10/11/13)
Notice of Judgment in Favor of Respondent (filed 10/15/13)

Commentary

Gerrymandering as Viewpoint Discrimination: A "Functional Equivalence" Test

Edward B. Foley

A First Amendment test for identifying when a map is functionally equivalent to a facially discriminatory statute.

more commentary...

In the News

This is why US election ballots routinely go missing

Professor Dan Tokaji was quoted in USA Today about the prevalence of missing election ballots.

"Most of the time, it just goes unreported because it doesn't affect the result," Tokaji said.

more EL@M in the news...

Info & Analysis

Supreme Court Finds Partisan Gerrymandering Claims to be Non-Justiciable Political Questions

In a 5-4 decision, the U.S. Supreme Court issued an opinion on Thursday determining that claims of partisan gerrymandering are political questions beyond the reach of the federal courts. The opinion resolved disputes originating in North Carolina and Maryland, in the cases of Rucho v. Common Cause and Lamone v. Benisek.

more info & analysis...

Major Pending Cases

more litigation...

Election Law @ Moritz | The Ohio State University Michael E. Moritz College of Law | electionlaw@osu.edu

Please note: Election Law @ Moritz is nonpartisan and does not endorse, support, or oppose any candidate, campaign, or party. Opinions expressed by individuals associated with Election Law @ Moritz, either on this web site or in connection with conferences or other activities undertaken by the program, represent solely the views of the individuals offering the opinions and not the program itself. Election Law @ Moritz institutionally does not represent any clients or participate in any litigation. Individuals affiliated with the program may in their own personal capacity participate in campaign or election activity, or engage in pro bono representation of clients other than partisan candidates or organizations.

PDF files in this site require Adobe Reader to view (link opens in NEW window). If you have trouble accessing this page or need to request an alternate format, please email the Moritz Law Webmaster.

OSU Navigation Bar