What did the court decide?

The court denied the request to accept a late appellate brief and quashed the appeal because the brief was not filed on time.

Who is affected by this decision?

Appellant Thelma Peake is affected because her appeal is ended; the candidate Shaun Griffith’s nomination challenge will not proceed further in this appeal.

Does this decision address the merits of the nomination petition?

No. The court dismissed the appeal on procedural grounds and did not rule on the underlying nomination-petition claims.

Can this be appealed further?

This order is from the state supreme court; opportunities to seek further review are extremely limited and would typically require extraordinary relief, so consult counsel promptly.

In Re: Nom. of Griffith; Apl. of: Peake

Docket 17 EAP 2026

Court of record · Indexed in NoticeRegistry archive · AI-enriched for research

CivilDismissed

Filed: Apr 15, 2026 · 2 weeks ago
Jurisdiction: Pennsylvania
Court: Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Type: Unanimous Opinion
Case type: Civil
Disposition: Dismissed
Docket: 17 EAP 2026

Application for leave to file an appellate brief nunc pro tunc following an appeal in a nomination-petition proceeding

Summary

The Pennsylvania Supreme Court denied Thelma Peake's late request to file her appellate brief after the deadline and quashed her appeal in a dispute over Shaun Griffith’s nomination petition for Pennsylvania’s 3rd Congressional District. The court acted on an application for leave to file the brief nunc pro tunc and concluded the application must be denied. Because Peake failed to file a timely brief, the Court ended the appeal without reaching the merits of the underlying nomination-petition dispute.

Issues Decided

Whether the court should grant leave to file an appellate brief nunc pro tunc
Whether failure to file a timely brief warrants quashing the appeal

Court's Reasoning

The court exercised its discretion over procedural defaults and found the appellant did not justify excusing the late filing. Because timely briefing is a prerequisite to an appeal proceeding, the court concluded the appropriate remedy for the unexplained or unjustified failure to file was to deny the nunc pro tunc request and quash the appeal. The decision did not address the underlying merits of the nomination-petition dispute.

Parties

Appellant: Thelma Peake
Respondent: Shaun Griffith (candidate)
Court: Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, Eastern District

Key Dates

Decision date: 2026-04-15

What You Should Do Next

1
Consult an attorney immediately
A lawyer can assess whether any extraordinary or collateral relief is available and advise about timing and likelihood.
2
Consider filing a petition for rehearing or extraordinary relief
If there are strong grounds (such as a procedural error or excusable delay), counsel may consider a timely petition for rehearing or an emergency petition, noting strict deadlines.
3
Preserve records and deadlines
Gather all filings, proof of service, and communications about the briefing deadline to support any further applications or collateral motions.

Frequently Asked Questions

What did the court decide?: The court denied the request to accept a late appellate brief and quashed the appeal because the brief was not filed on time.
Who is affected by this decision?: Appellant Thelma Peake is affected because her appeal is ended; the candidate Shaun Griffith’s nomination challenge will not proceed further in this appeal.
Does this decision address the merits of the nomination petition?: No. The court dismissed the appeal on procedural grounds and did not rule on the underlying nomination-petition claims.
Can this be appealed further?: This order is from the state supreme court; opportunities to seek further review are extremely limited and would typically require extraordinary relief, so consult counsel promptly.

The above suggestions and answers are AI-generated for informational purposes only. They may contain errors. NoticeRegistry assumes no responsibility for their accuracy. Consult a qualified attorney before relying on them.

Full Filing Text

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA
                              EASTERN DISTRICT


 IN RE: NOMINATION PETITION OF SHAUN                 : No. 17 EAP 2026
 GRIFFITH CANDIDATE FOR                              :
 PENNSYLVANIA'S 3RD CONGRESSIONAL                    :
 DISTRICT, DEMOCRATIC PARTY                          :
                                                     :
                                                     :
 APPEAL OF: THELMA PEAKE                             :


                                        ORDER



PER CURIAM                                                    DECIDED: April 15, 2026

      AND NOW, this 15th day of April, 2026, the Application of Appellant Thelma Peake

for Leave to File Brief Nunc Pro Tunc is hereby DENIED. Appellant’s Notice of Appeal is

hereby QUASHED for failure to file a timely brief.