In re General Election for District Justice 670 A.2d 629 543 Pa. 216, 670 A.2d 629 (Cite as: 543 Pa. 216, 670 A.2d 629) Page 2 231k3 Most Cited Cases Substantial evidence supported finding that ballot tampering occurred to at least some degree in district justice election; results of two properly operating machine tabulations revealed substantial differences in vote totals for each candidate and in five particular precincts within race, such difference occurred because of altered marks, changes favored one candidate, ballot boxes were left unsecured for period of time, and numerous keys were distributed to ballot boxes. [13] Elections 253 144k253 Most Cited Cases Where discrepancy results from fraudulent tampering with ballot boxes and their contents, since official canvas of votes, court is fully justified in directing that fraudulently altered ballots be counted for candidate for whom evidence shows they must necessarily have been counted by election officials, and it would commit grievous error to do otherwise. [9] Justices of the Peace 3 231k3 Most Cited Cases Trial court's failure to make specific findings regarding degree of ballot tampering in district justice election made it impossible for Supreme Court to review whether setting aside election was appropriate remedy or to evaluate claim that trial court should have awarded election to one candidate based on first machine count, as audited, together with write-in votes; trial court failed to identify ballots it concluded had been altered and explain reasons for its conclusions and to likewise identify ballots that it was unable to classify as either altered or unaltered and explain reasons for its conclusions. [14] Elections 293(3) 144k293(3) Most Cited Cases Voters, who could identify their ballots because they had designated themselves as write-in candidates for various offices, could voluntarily appear and testify regarding how he or she originally voted where votes had been properly cast but subsequently altered through no fault of voters. [15] Justices of the Peace 3 231k3 Most Cited Cases Fact that District Attorney openly endorsed candidate for district justice did not render disqualification of District Attorney from participating in district justice election contest necessary. [10] Elections 227(8) 144k227(8) Most Cited Cases Even mere casting of fraudulent votes is not sufficient to throw out a return; instead, if it is at all possible, fraudulent votes should be purged and remaining votes retained. [16] Justices of the Peace 3 231k3 Most Cited Cases Any supposed conflict of interest resulting from participation of District Attorney, who openly endorsed candidate, in district justice election contest would go to weight of testimony rather than its admissibility. **630*219 John P. Dohanich, Rowley, Smith & Lewis, P.C., Ambridge, for Appellant at No. 23. J. Philip Colavincenzo, Beaver, for Appellant at No. 33. [11] Elections 227(8) 144k227(8) Most Cited Cases It is only when election has been characterized by such fraud or intimidation or other unlawful conduct as to make election a mere travesty or when ballots or voting machines are in such condition that it is impossible to ascertain from inspection of them the will of the voters that court will reject entire returns from district and annul election. [12] Elections 253 144k253 Most Cited Cases Where evidence establishes that ballots were altered between time of initial tabulation and recount, discarding votes is wholly untenable. J. Philip Colavincenzo, Beaver, for Delores A. Laughlin. John P. Dohanich, Rowley, Smith & Lewis, P.C., Ambridge for Joseph Zupsic. *220 David M. Fouse and Mary L. David, Beaver County Law Department, for Bureau of Elections. Before NIX, C.J., and FLAHERTY, ZAPPALA, PAPADAKOS, CAPPY, CASTILLE and MONTEMURO, JJ. © 2006 Thomson/West. No Claim to Orig. U.S. Govt. Works. 243