# In Re: Dawn Segal, Judge

> Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · November 22, 2017 · 173 A.3d 603

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9879345

## Case

- **Full name:** In RE: Dawn A. SEGAL, Municipal Court Judge First Judicial District Philadelphia County. Appeal Of: Dawn A. Segal
- **Court:** Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
- **Decided:** November 22, 2017
- **Citations:** 173 A.3d 603
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Dissent by Donohue
- **Judges:** Saylor, Baer, Todd, Donohue, Dougherty, Wecht, Mundy
- **Cited by:** 0 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9879345

## Opinion text

JUSTICE DONOHUE, DISSENTING
For the reasons set forth in my Dissenting Opinion in In re: Angeles Roca, 42 EAP 2016, — Pa. -, 173 A.3d 1176 , I respectfully dissent. Although Judge Se-gal’s misconduct differed materially from that of Judge Roca, the Court of Judicial Discipline (“CJD”) imposed the same sanction (permanent removal from judicial office) while employing substantially identical language in its two written opinions and made no attempt to adhere to the doctrine of stare decisis. As a result, in my view, the sanction imposed by the CJD removing Judge Segal was not lawful pursuant to Article V, Section 18(c)(2) of the Pennsylvania Constitution. Thus, I would vacate the order imposing sanctions and remand for the preparation of an opinion in which the CJD adheres to the doctrine of stare decisis in imposing a sanction in this matter.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9879345. Public record. Not legal advice.