Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Supreme CRT Stilp v. Kane
Supreme CRT Stilp v. Kane
:
:
:
:
:
No.
:
:
:
:
:
BRUCE BEEMER
:
FIRST DEPUTY
:
ATTORNEY GENERAL,
:
:
RESPONDENTS :
KATHLEEN KANE
PENNSYLVANIA
ATTORNEY GENERAL
___________________________________________________________________________________
Attorney General are now attempting to remove Kathleen Kane as attorney general for "reasonable
cause" under Article VI, Section 7 of the Constitution.
Since Kathleen Kane's legal suspension, on September 21, 2015, the Office of Attorney General
legal functioning has been assumed for the most part by the First Deputy Attorney General and a
battery of three Executive Deputy Attorneys General under him. Some legal tasks had apparently
been delegated by Kane.
The purpose of this case is to ask the Pennsylvania Supreme Court if assumption of the the
Constitutional authority of the Attorney General and the duties of the Attorney General under the
Commonwealth Attorneys Act by the First Deputy Attorney General and the Executive Deputy
Attorneys General is legal when there is no vacancy in the position of Attorney General and no
definitive delegation of authority has occurred for many of the duties of the Attorney General as
listed in the Commonwealth Attorneys Act.
Furthermore, the purpose of this case is also to give the staff of the Office of Attorney General the
proper guidelines in the present unprecedented set of facts where an attorney general with a
suspended law license cannot function as an attorney general in any legal capacity, and the Office
of Attorney General staff has not effectively been delegated the legal authority, before the
effective suspension of the law license of the Attorney General, for many of the duties that are
listed as the duties of the Attorney General in the Commonwealth Attorneys Act.
The Supreme Court shall have and exercise the powers vested in it by the Constitution
of Pennsylvania, including the power generally to minister justice to all persons and to
exercise the powers of the court, as fully and amply, to all intents and purposes, as the
justices of the Court of King's Bench, Common Pleas and Exchequer, at Westminster.
or any of them, could or might do on May 22, 1722.
42 Pa. C.S.A. 502; see also Pa. Constr. art. V, 2 ("The Supreme Court shall have
jurisdiction as shall be provided by law.")
2
Petitioner has no other forum within which to seek final redress for these grievances
This Court has jurisdiction and is the only venue wherein the controversy outlined
in the Petition for Review attached hereto can be ultimately heard and determined with finality.
III. PARTIES
4
Respondent Kathleen Kane is the elected Pennsylvania Attorney General who was
sworn in on January 15, 2013. Kathleen Kane was suspended from the practice of law in Pennsylvania
on September 21, 2015.
5 Respondent Bruce Beemer is the First Deputy Attorney General. Mr. Beemer has
three Executive Deputy Attorneys General named James Donahue, Robert Mulle, and Lawrence
Cherba. All of the above are Pennsylvania attorneys.
6 Your Petitioner in the present filing is Gene Stilp, a Pennsylvania citizen and
taxpayer. Gene Stilp is a taxpayer advocate and citizen activist who has brought successful actions in
various courts on key topics of Pennsylvania law. For example, Mr. Stilp was the pro se, successful
petitioner under this very same King's Bench application process before the Pennsylvania Supreme
Court filed in the 2005 pay raise case in Pennsylvania Supreme Court against the legislature's use of
the unvouchered expenses to increase their pay. Gene Stilp also filed the King's Bench Petition on
October 20, 2015 to ask this Court to force the use of Article VI, Section 7. That petition was
withdrawn when the Senate finally acted to utilize the Article VI, Section 7 removal process.
Taxpayer status to file in the Supreme Court stands because no administrative or legislative activity
has been undertaken to clarify the exact duties to be exercised by staff of the Office of Attorney
General in light of an attorney general having a suspended law license. Petitioner realizes that the
situation is critical for the administration of justice and there are no guidelines when a suspended
attorney cannot act in any legal capacity as the head of the Office of Attorney General, that office
being in charge of the enforcement of laws in Pennsylvania. In a letter dated October 26, 2015,
Petitioner had asked the First Deputy Attorney General Bruce Beemer to seek the Commonwealth
Court's guidance in this matter but no action in that Court or the Supreme Court has been commenced
by First deputy Beemer or any other party. Mr. Stilp has filed six Disciplinary Board complaints
against Kathleen Kane from August 11, 2015 to November 3, 2015 as more and more of Kane's
behavior was revealed. There is no administrative action that can be undertaken to resolve the legal
delegation situation.
7 Mr. Stilp was also the successful complainant in the Federal Third Circuit
District Court and the Third Circuit Court of Appeals in 2010 against the Pennsylvania State
Ethics Commission involving the Pennsylvania State Ethics Commission violations of
citizens' First Amendment rights of Free Speech.
IV. STATEMENT OF MATERIAL FACTS
8.
9.
Kathleen Kane was elected in November of 2012 and became Attorney General in
January of 2013.
10.
The Sections of the Pennsylvania Constitution that refer to the Attorney General are
Article IV, Sections 4.1, 5, 6 and 7 for this Petition. These are Exhibit A.
11.
Certain sections of the Commonwealth Attorneys Act, Act of October 15, 1980, P.L.
950, No. 164. are also applicable to this case. This is Exhibit B.
12. Kathleen Kane has been charged with numerous crimes.
13. The Montgomery County District Attorney charged Kathleen Kane with perjury, false
swearing, abuse of office, official, suppression, and contempt of court on August 6, 2015. That
official charge sheet is attached as Exhibit C.
14. On August 25, 2015, the Disciplinary Board of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court
filed a Petition to suspend the law license of Kathleen Kane.
15. On September 21, 2015, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court issued an Order suspending the
law license of Attorney General Kathleen Kane as of October 21, 2015. That Order is Exhibit
D.
16. On October 1, 2015, the Montgomery County District Attorney filed new charges
31. The First Deputy Attorney General and the Executive Deputy Attorneys General
have stated that they had sought the guidance of the Disciplinary Board by letter but did not
receive a reply.
32. The First Deputy Attorney General and the Executive Deputy Attorneys General
did not file a case on this matter with either the Commonwealth Court or the Supreme Court
asking either court to furnish the legal framework for the legal authority on how to proceed in
this situation of first impression. First Deputy Attorney General said at the November 18,
2105 Senate hearing at time mark 97:00 of the hearing that he had searched nationally for a
comparative situation and could find none. The Attorney General, Kathleen Kane while not
being able to practice law and not being able to direct any legal action in the OAG did not ask
the courts for direction either. Kane would have had to file through a private attorney after the
suspension because Kane would not have been able to direct the OAG attorneys to file such a
case. Kane has taken no such private action. In a letter dated August 26, 2105 this Petitioner
had asked First Deputy Attorney General Beemer to file a case before the Commonwealth
Court seeking their help when no direction on the delegation of duties was available from
Kane. This letter is Exhibit I.
33.
Petitioner is therefore left to file this Petition and hopefully certain parties will respond
with legal solutions, and amicus briefs from constitutional experts may enlighten the path to be
followed in this case of first impression.
34. Section 204 lists the legal areas where the Attorney General must be engaged.
Section 204 (a) (1) has the Attorney General giving legal advice to the Governor. Section
204 (a) (3) has the Attorney General defending the constitutionality of statutes. Section 204
(a) (4) has the Attorney General rendering a legal opinion related to appropriations. Section
204 (b) has the Attorney General reviewing the rules and regulations of the Commonwealth
agencies. Under this section the Attorney General can appeal decisions of various agencies
to Commonwealth Court. Section 204 (c) has the Attorney General representing the
Commonwealth and its agencies in actions brought against the Commonwealth, and may
intervene in charitable bequests and trusts, anti trust laws, collection of all debts or taxes and
settlement of defined cases. Section 204 (d) has the Attorney general administering the
Consumer Affairs programs. Section 204 (e) refers to the limitations on the Attorney
General on the settlement of claims. Section 204 (f) sets out the Attorney General's duties in
authority. Also various sections refer to the personal he or his when referring to the
Attorney General's duties under the sections. See sections 204 (a) (1), 204 (a) (4), 204 (b), 204
c, 204 (f), 205 (a) (5), 205 (a) (6), 205 (d), 206 (a), 207, and 208.
44. These references to he and his refer to the person of the attorney general and not
the Office of Attorney General.
45. In the present case, that person is the elected Attorney General Kathleen Kane, who
by reason of legal suspension cannot participate in any of the legal duties under these sections
of the Commonwealth Attorneys Act.
46. Although Kathleen Kane under the pressure of the Disciplinary Rule 217 apparently
designated certain attorneys in the OAG for wiretap and grand jury duties, the bulk of the legal
duties of the Attorney General remain legally undelegated by any document.
47. The First Deputy Attorney General and the Executive Deputy Attorneys General
who have assumed control of the overall legal function of the Attorney General have to point to
exactly where all there assumed delegated legal authority derives to satisfy this Court.
48. Kathleen Kane has to show where legal authority was delegated and to who when
Kane was suspended. Could the lack of exercising the delegation of legal authority by Kane
could be construed as a dereliction of duty and a violation of Rule 217 of the Disciplinary Code
and add to the reasonable cause argument for Kane's removal under the Article VI, Section 7, a
constitutional removal process for an attorney general?
Rules.
AN ORDER from the Supreme Court defining the the non-transference of legal duties in the present
case as a gross violation of the Disciplinary Code and as such the violation can serve as
reasonable cause for removal of the attorney as attorney general under Article VI, Section 7 of
the Pennsylvania Constitution.
The Questions sought to be addressed in the Application for Leave to File are incorporated here by
reference. Whatsoever other writs, orders or decrees as shall be constitutional, just and equitable.
Respectfully submitted,
Gene Stilp, citizen, pro se
VERIFICATION
I, Gene Stilp. aver that the statements in the foregoing petition for review are true and
correct to the best of my knowledge or information and belief. I make this verification subject
to 18 Pa. C.S. 4904 relating to unsworn falsification to authorities.
:
:
:
:
:
No.
:
KATHLEEN KANE
:
PENNSYLVANIA
:
ATTORNEY GENERAL
:
:
BRUCE BEEMER
:
FIRST DEPUTY
:
ATTORNEY GENERAL,
:
:
RESPONDENTS :
NOTICE TO PLEAD
To Respondents: KATHLEEN KANE AND BRUCE BEEMER
You are hereby notified pursuant to Pa. R.A.P. 3309(b) to file a written response to the enclosed
APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO FILE ORIGINAL PROCESS PURSUANT TO PENNSYLVANIA RULE
OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE 3307 within fourteen (14) days from service hereof or a judgment may be
entered against you.
______________________________
Gene Stilp, citizen, pro se
:
:
:
:
:
No.
:
KATHLEEN KANE
:
PENNSYLVANIA
:
ATTORNEY GENERAL
:
:
BRUCE BEEMER
:
FIRST DEPUTY
:
ATTORNEY GENERAL,
:
:
RESPONDENTS :
CERTIFICATION OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that I am this day serving the foregoing document upon the persons and in the manner
indicated below which services satisfies the requirements of Pa. R.A.P. 121:
Service by hand delivery:
Kathleen Kane
16th Floor
Strawberry Square
Harrisburg, PA 17120
First Deputy Attorney General
Bruce Beemer
16th Floor
Strawberry Square
Harrisburg, PA 17120
Date: November 23, 2015
_____________________________
Gene Stilp
1550 Fishing Creek Valley Road
Harrisburg, PA 17112
717-829-5600