At the Pennsylvania Attorney General’s Office, Keli Neary has represented the Commonwealth in a number of notable suits. She has now been nominated for a lifetime appointment to the federal bench.

Background

Neary received a B.A. cum laude from the University of Pittsburgh at Johnstown in 2003 and a J.D. from Widener University Commonwealth Law School in 2006.

After graduating, Neary clerked on the Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas and then joined the Pennsylvania State Police’s Office of Chief Counsel. In 2012, Neary joined the Pennsylvania Attorney General’s Office, where she currently serves as Executive Deputy Attorney General in the Civil Division.

History of the Seat

The seat Neary has been nominated for will open on January 17, 2025, when Judge Christopher Conner takes senior status.

Legal Experience

Neary started her career at the Office of Chief Counsel for the Pennsylvania State Police. While in this role, Neary defended against Open Records requests filed seeking information from the police. See, e.g., State Police v. Office of Open Records, 995 A.2d 515 (Comm. Ct. Pa. 2010). Neary also represented the Police in grievances and pay disputes. See, e.g., State Police v. State Troopers Ass’n, 992 A.2d 969 (Comm. Ct. Pa. 2010). In one notable case, the Pennsylvania Superior Court denied an appeal argued by Neary seeking to block discovery of personnel records of a state trooper, ruling that the granting of a motion to compel could not be appealed on an interlocutory basis. See Com. v. Brister, 16 A.3d 530 (Pa. Sup. Ct. 2011).

In 2012, Neary shifted to the Pennsylvania Attorney General’s Office, where she has worked since, where, among other cases, she defends the state against constitutional claims. See, e.g., Musila v. Lock Haven University, 970 F. Supp. 2d 384 (M.D. Pa. 2013). Among these matters, Neary represented the State in a bench trial over constitutional claims arising from the plaintiff’s ejection from a Pennsylvania horse racing stadium and the suspension of his horse trainer’s license. See Adamo v. Dillon, 900 F. Supp. 2d 499 (M.D. Pa. 2012). Notably, Neary represented the State of Pennsylvania in a 2016 suit filed by Presidential candidate Roque de la Fuente, who sought a ballot position. See De La Fuente v. Cortes, 261 F. Supp. 3d 543 (M.D. Pa. 2017). Neary also represented the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania in defending against a suit arguing that the Takings Clause prohibits the state creation and funding of the Joint Underwriting Association as a medical malpractice insurer. See Pa. Prof. Liab. Joint Underwriting Ass’n v. Wolf, 324 F. Supp. 3d 519 (M.D. Pa. 2018).

Among other matters, Neary defended against suits seeking to change an individual’s Sexual Offender Registration status. See, e.g., Konyk v. Pennsylvania State Police of Com., 133 A.3d 96 (Comm. Ct. Pa. 2016); Dougherty v. Pennsylvania State Police of Com., 138 A.3d 152 (Comm. Ct. Pa. 2016).

Among other politically salient cases she has handled, Neary defended Pennsylvania’s Contact Tracing and Mask Mandate programs developed during the Covid-19 pandemic. See Parker v. Wolf, 506 F. Supp. 3d 271 (M.D. Pa. 2020). She was also part of the legal team defending the results of the 2020 Presidential election in Pennsylvania against suits brought by former President Trump seeking to throw out lawfully cast votes. See Donald J. Trump for President, Inc. v. Boockvar, 502 F. Supp. 3d 899 (M.D. Pa. 2020). Neary also participated in suits against Pennsylvania’s indoor dining ban. See M. Rae, Inc. v. Wolf, 509 F. Supp. 3d 235 (M.D. Pa. 2020).

Overall Assessment

Neary’s time in the Attorney General’s office has given her both extensive experience litigating in the Harrisburg Division of Pennsylvania’s Middle District as well as participation in several particularly controversial cases, involving both Covid-19 related restrictions and Pennsylvania’s election regulations. It is likely that Neary will draw some opposition to her confirmation based on her positions in these suits, although, acting as an advocate, Neary can likely draw a distinction between her own positions and those of her client.

A fixture of the Luzerne County legal community, Chief Magistrate Judge Joseph Saporito is President Biden’s third nominee to the Middle District of Pennsylvania.

Background

A native of Pittston Pennsylvania, where he was born in 1960, Saporito received a B.A. from Villanova University in 1982 and a J.D. from Dickinson School of Law in 1985. He then spent two years as his father’s office as an Associate before moving to a joint practice, where he stayed for 28 years. Saporito also spent thirty years as a part-time assistant public defender in Wilkes-Barre.

In 2015, Saporito became a U.S. Magistrate Judge with the Middle District of Pennsylvania, where he currently serves as Chief Magistrate.

History of the Seat

Saporito has been nominated to replace Judge Malachy Mannion, who moved to senior status on January 3, 2024.

Legal Experience

Saporito has spent his entire legal career in practice in Luzerne County, practicing both civil and criminal law. Among the cases he handled, Saporito represented a cabinetmaker who sued the Town of Exeter in seeking permission to use his property for his business. See Scalzo v. Twp. of Exeter, No. 4:96-cv-01760 (M.D. Pa. filed Sept. 27, 1996). On the criminal side, Saporito represented an individual charged with possession with intent to distribute ecstasy, who was acquitted after a jury trial. See Commonwealth v. Singer, No. 1893 of 2001 (Luzerne Cnty. (Pa.) Ct. Com. Pl.).

Additionally, Saporito also served as a part-time assistant public defender between 1985 and 2015 in Luzerne County. Among his notable cases in this role, Saporito secured an acquittal for a defendant charged with assaulting a homeless man. See Commonwealth v. Geasey, No. 1656 of 2009 (Lucerne Cnty. (Pa.) Ct. Com. Pl.).

Judicial Experience

From 2015, Saporito has served as a federal magistrate judge. As a magistrate judge, Saporito handles arraignments and bail decisions, as well as presiding over cases where parties consent. As a magistrate judge, Saporito has presided over 14 jury trials and two bench trials. Among these trials, Saporito presided over a medical negligence trial regarding the misdiagnosis of an ankle fracture as a sprain. See Hunter v. Kennedy, No. 3:17-cv-00007 (M.D. Pa.).

Among the notable opinions that Saporito has authored, he ruled that qualified immunity required dismissal of a lawsuit brought by a student who was injured while in gym class without appropriate protective equipment. See Cuvo v. Pocono Mountain Sch. Dist., 2022 WL 836821 (M.D. Pa. Mar. 21, 2022). Saporito’s decision was affirmed on appeal. See Cuvo v. Pocono Mountain Sch. Dist., 2023 WL 4994527 (3d Cir. Aug. 4, 2023).

Political Activity

Saporito has donated extensively throughout until his ascension to the bench, giving mostly to Pennsylvania Democrats. Saporito has donated particularly frequently to Sen. Bob Casey, giving approximately $3000-4000 to his campaigns.

Overall Assessment

With a decade on the bench and an additional three decades in practice, Saporito approaches the federal bench with an extensive record. However, there is little in Saporito’s record that is likely to ignite controversy, and, as such, he is favored to gain a lifetime appointment by the end of the year.

President Biden has nominated fellow Scranton native Karoline Mehalchick, a federal magistrate judge, to a vacancy on the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania.

Background

Born in 1976 in Scranton, Pennsylvania, Karoline Mehalchick received a B.Sc. from Pennsylvania State University in 1998 and a J.D. from Tulane Law School in 2001.

After graduating, Mehalchick clerked for Judge Trish Corbett with the Lackawanna County Court of Common Pleas and then joined Oliver, Price & Rhodes as an Associate, becoming Partner in 2008. In 2013, Mehalchick was appointed to be a federal magistrate judge, where she currently serves.

History of the Seat

The seat Mehalchick has been nominated for opened on August 1, 2021 with the move to senior status of Judge John Jones.

Legal Experience

Between 2002 and 2013, Mehalchick worked at the firm of Oliver, Price & Rhodes in Lackawanna County, frequently representing municipalities in defending against various suits. See, e.g., Smith v. Borough of Dunmore, 633 F.3d 176 (3d Cir. 2011). Among her notable cases, Mehalchick represented the Diocese of Scranton in defending against suits brought by individuals alleging sexual abuse from ordained clergy in the diocese. See Doe v. Liberatore, 478 F. Supp. 2d 742 (M.D. Pa. 2007). Mehalchick has also represented private parties, including in an unfair competition suit brought in federal court. See Bobrick Corp. v. Santana Prods. Inc., 698 F.Supp.2d 479 (M.D. Pa. 2010).

On the plaintiff’s side, Mehalchick represented plaintiffs in a suit denying them a permit to place an outdoor sign on Interstate 81. See Joyce Outdoor v. Dep’t of Transp., 49 A.3d 518 (Comm. Ct. Pa. 2012).

Mehalchick also argued cases before the Third Circuit, including a defense of the Borough of Dunmore against a 1983 suit brought by a full-time firefighter. See Dee v. Borough of Dunmore, 549 F.3d 225 (3d Cir. 2008).

Judicial Experience

Since 2013, Mehalchick has served as a federal magistrate judge on the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania. In this role, Mehalchick handles bond and release decisions, administrative law cases, discovery disputes, settlement, as well as reports and recommendations on substantive motions. See, e.g., Luciano-Jimenez v. Doll, 547 F. Supp. 3d 462 (M.D. Pa. 2021) (Mannion, J.) (accepting Judge Mehalchick’s recommendation ordering a prisoner released with conditions).

A number of Mehalchick’s rulings and opinions have been appealed to the Third Circuit, which has largely affirmed the rulings. See, e.g., Talley v. Wetzel, 15 F.4th 275 (3d Cir. 2021) (affirming district court order allowing prisoner to proceed in forma pauperis). In one notable opinion, Mehalchick ruled, on an issue of first impression, that incentive bonuses by third parties need to be included by employers when calculating the overtime rate. See Secretary United States Department of Labor v. Bristol Excavating Co., 935 F.3d 122 (3d Cir. 2019). The Third Circuit affirmed in part and reversed in part, finding that all incentive bonuses do not necessarily need to be considered when calculating overtime and that the record did not support the conclusion that the overtime bonuses in this case should be considered. See id. at 128.

Among other cases where Mehalchick’s opinion has been reversed, two Third Circuit panel reversed her grant of summary judgment against prisoner suits for lack of exhaustion. See Downey v. Pennsylvania Dep’t of Corr., 968 F.3d 299 (3d Cir. 2020); Hardy v. Shaikh, 959 F.3d 578 (3d Cir. 2020).

Political Activity

Mehalchick’s sole donation of record is to former Scranton mayor Christopher Doherty, a Democrat.

Overall Assessment

With experience in private practice and a decade as a magistrate judge, Mehalchick has racked up a significant legal record for her relatively young age. Given her relatively mainstream record, Mehalchick should see a comfortable confirmation.

The daughter of former federal judge James Munley, Julia K. Munley is poised to fill her father’s old seat on the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania.

Background

The 57 year old Munley was born into a storied Pennsylvania family, with her great-grandfather, grandfather, and grandmother having served in the Pennsylvania General Assembly as Democrats. Munley attended Marywood University in Scranton, receiving a B.A. degree in 1987, and subsequently getting a law degree from Penn State Dickinson Law in 1992.

After graduating, Munley clerked for Judge Stephen McEwen with the Pennsylvania Superior Court and then joined Masterson, Braunfield, Maguire & Brown as an Associate. In 1995, Munley switched to Mazzoni & Karam, and in 2001, became a partner at Munley Law.

In 2016, Governor Tom Wolf appointed Munley to the Court of Common Pleas of Lackawanna County, where she currently serves.

History of the Seat

The seat Munley has been nominated for opened on September 30, 2022, with the move to senior status of Judge Robert Mariani. Mariani, in turn, replaced Munley’s father, Judge James Munley, in 2011.

Legal Experience

While she has shifted firms on occasion, Munley spent the first twenty five years of her career in private practice, practicing in state and federal court. Notably, Munley argued before the Third Circuit (with a panel including then-Judge Samuel Alito) on behalf of Wayne Stevens, who was accused of sexual harassment and won a four-day jury trial. See Johnson v. Elk Lake Sch. Dist., 283 F.3d 138 (3d Cir. 2002). The Third Circuit unanimously upheld the district court’s denial of the plaintiff’s motion for a new trial. See id. Munley also represented numerous Allstate agents in a suit against the insurance company alleging improper termination. See Romero v. Allstate Ins. Co., (E.D. Pa. July 6, 2016).

On the state court side, Munley has handled civil claims, including insurance litigation. See, e.g., Md. Casualty Co. v. McGrath, No. 355 MDA 2015 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2015).

Judicial Experience

From 2016, Munley has served as a Judge on the Lackawanna County Court of Common Pleas, which are the primary trial courts in Pennsylvania. As a judge, Munley presided over cases in civil and criminal matters, as well as domestic relations, juvenile, and family law matters. A number of Munley’s rulings in family law matters have been appealed to the Pennsylvania Superior Court, which has affirmed. See, e.g., In the Interest of MM-A, No. 928 MDA 2017 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2017); Jablonowski v. Jablonowski, No. 1481 MDA 2018 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2019); B.V. v. J.W., No. 746 MDA 2020 (Pa. Super. 2020); Jones v. Jones, No. 1647 MDA 2021 (Pa. Super. 2022).

In a notable opinion, Munley held that a plaintiff corporation could sue in Pennsylvania state court without registering with the state as it had sufficient activity within the state. See SMS Financial Ch., LLC v. Bolus Truck Parts & Towing, Inc., No. 542 MDA 2022 (Pa. Super. 2022). The Pennsylvania Superior Court affirmed Munley’s ruling, finding it to be “detailed and well-reasoned” and that it “accurately and thoroughly disposes of the standing issue.” See id.

Political Activity

Munley has donated extensively throughout her political career until her ascension to the bench. Her donations are exclusively to Democrats, including Wolf, President Biden, and former Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton.

Overall Assessment

Munley is the first Pennsylvania nominee, since Senator Eastland made the blue slip a home-state veto, who would not need a blue slip from a Republican senator to reach the bench. That being said, her extensive home state contacts and legal experience, alongside her relative lack of controversy makes her a consensus nominee.