Judge Harry F. Smail Jr. Runs for Superior Court
'I do not legislate from the bench; rather, I apply and enforce the law as intended as the third branch of government providing the checks and balances that make our government functional. My record is transparent, verifiable and honorable in being the most qualified to be seated on the Superior Court.'
April 14, 2023 at 10:38 AM
6 minute read
JudgesCandidate: Judge Harry F. Smail Jr.
Court: Superior Court
Party: Republican
Pennsylvania Bar Association rating: Recommended
The following has been edited lightly for length and style.
The Legal Intelligencer: Tell us about your background, where you went to law school, what firms you have practiced at, and areas of law you focus on.
Judge Harry F. Smail Jr.: Grove City College, 1984-1988, dual degree in business administration and marketing and political science. Prelaw Duquesne University School of Law, evening program, 1993-1997, while being a full-time Probation/Parole Officer. Blum, Reiss & Plaitano, 1997-1998. Law Offices of Harry F. Smail Jr, 1998-2014. Judge of the 10th District Court of Westmoreland County, 2014-present.
As an attorney, I practiced in a wide range of areas of complex civil litigation such as medical malpractice, personal injury, contractual disputes, state and federal employment law, bankruptcy, constitutional and civil rights. In addition, I also dealt with wills and estates, drafting last wills and testaments, powers of attorney, and trusts, and assisting in estate planning. I represented criminal defendants privately and through the state conflict counsel programs through the counties for those eligible for public defender representation.
My legal representative service also extended to defendants on the federal level through the Criminal Justice Act and Federal Public Defender's Office of indigent defendants. My criminal practice included all manner of felonies from murder through misdemeanors, including a full spectrum of DUI, theft, property and fraud through summary offenses, including criminal behavior/vehicle code violations/civil tort. My practice also handled family law, including custody, divorce, equitable distribution, child support, child and youth services, guardian ad litem, guardianships and protection from abuse cases.
I handled appeals in all levels of state court and in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit through the Western District Courts of Pennsylvania. During my nine and a half years as a judge, I served in family court and as a de facto civil division judge, handling complex civil litigation.
The Legal: What is one major thing about your career experience that most qualifies you for this position, and why?
Smail: I was appointed as a judge in 2014 by Gov. Tom Corbett after an exhaustive vetting and confirmation process. I was unanimously confirmed by the state Senate. The next year I won both the Republican and Democratic nominations for a full 10-year term on the bench. I think this demonstrates my record both as an attorney and a judge as one that can be supported by all people regardless of partisan affiliation. This change in my career path helped me become the judge lawyers sought to practice before. Prior to my time on the bench, I had 17 years of jury trial, bench trial, evidentiary hearings, administrative hearings, workers' compensation proceedings, employment benefit hearings, Children and Youth Service hearings and juvenile proceedings.
This experience that formed my practice has permitted me to gain the discipline, comprehension and due diligence to be a thorough and predictable judge that litigants, parties and counsel can count on for quick rulings and to keep the proceedings moving efficiently and transparently. My 26 years of experience as both a litigation attorney and a judge has provided me with a unique well of experience to handle all the areas of law that come before the Superior Court. On day one, I will be able to become a judge of judges, which is what a Superior Court judge is called upon to do.
The Legal: What is the main reason Pennsylvania voters should pick you?
Smail: Pennsylvania voters should vote for me because I have a comprehensive record as a litigation attorney and as a trial judge in all practice and subject areas that come before the Superior Court. My opinions have a 97% affirmation rate, with only 3% remanded to me for procedural adjustments. My decorum and procedural adherence to the law of Pennsylvania are unwavering. I do not legislate from the bench; rather, I apply and enforce the law as intended as the third branch of government providing the checks and balances that make our government functional. My record is transparent, verifiable and honorable in being the most qualified to be seated on the Superior Court.
The Legal: What will be your approach to moving matters efficiently through the case management system?
Smail: I have the most efficient case management of the family docket, when I served in Family Court and in my current role on the civil docket of all jurists in the 10th District Court of Pennsylvania. My work ethic is unparalleled and statistically paramount. On the Superior Court, my motivation will be just as prevalent as I firmly believe justice delayed is justice denied. The appellate courts have a duty to deliver outcomes in a fashion that allows families to thrive, businesses to reset and move on after litigation, and for criminal litigants to know their futures without the stress of delayed rulings.
The Legal: What would you say to voters regarding your plans to ensure the equal administration of justice for all people?
Smail: Equal administration of the law is the foundation of our legal system to guarantee all are equal before the law and that no man or woman is above the law regardless of status. My career reflects my belief that justice is blind and not predisposed to judgment based on race, creed, gender, sexual orientation, nationality, appearance, wealth, political presence, perceived power, fame, notoriety, beliefs, affiliation, historical relevance or class. Each appeal and case has independent facts, events and applications of the law that must be assessed by constitutional analysis, first impression, if relevant, and precedent. As a judge of judges, I must ensure that the individuals before me had a fair chance to present their case and receive judgment based on the facts presented to the court.
The Legal: Where can voters go for more information about you?
Smail: www.votejudgesmail.com; www.facebook.com/VoteJudgeSmail
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllDemocrats Give Up Circuit Court Picks for Trial Judges in Reported Deal With GOP
A New State Law Is a Positive Step Forward for Judicial Security in Pennsylvania—But More Action Is Needed
5 minute readCommentary: Sen. Casey's Critical Role in Keeping Pa. Federal Courts Full
As Appointment Window Narrows, Vacancies on Phila. Court May Linger Until After Primaries
Trending Stories
- 1Gibson Dunn Sued By Crypto Client After Lateral Hire Causes Conflict of Interest
- 2Trump's Solicitor General Expected to 'Flip' Prelogar's Positions at Supreme Court
- 3Pharmacy Lawyers See Promise in NY Regulator's Curbs on PBM Industry
- 4Outgoing USPTO Director Kathi Vidal: ‘We All Want the Country to Be in a Better Place’
- 5Supreme Court Will Review Constitutionality Of FCC's Universal Service Fund
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250