From his work as President of the Allegheny County Bar Association to more than 15 years serving on the Gender Bias Subcommittee and his work with the Association’s Women in the Law Division, the Homer S Brown Division, and Attorneys Against Hunger; Bryan's spent a career bringing fairness, equity, and transparency to the practice of law.
Check out our new campaign video where Bryan discusses what it means to be a Superior Court Judge, his family background in Pennsylvania going back more than 100 years, and values of fairness and working toward the greater good so everyone can succeed.
Last week, confronted with a mountain of evidence to the contrary, an apparent supporter of my opponent, Jill Beck, immediately withdrew her challenge to my nomination petition for the Pennsylvania Superior Court. In the weeks prior, my supporters and I collected thousands of valid signatures across Pennsylvania to support my candidacy.
While I respect and support the need for open courts in Pennsylvania, this challenge was baseless and it is clear that the challenger failed to research the facts underlying the challenge. This kind of frivolous litigation is a waste of everyone’s time and judicial resources, and should not be tolerated.
Challenging a candidate’s nominating petition to prevent him or her from appearing on the ballot is an age-old, worn-out game in Pennsylvania; one that is grounded in the unspoken fear of facing a worthy opponent.
However, in recent years, and unlike many other states, Pennsylvania law has made the voters’ desire and candidates’ ballot access paramount over all other considerations. Our Democratic values include a belief that running for office must be accessible to all and voting should be accessible to everyone - I unwaveringly support that belief.
As those who challenged my candidacy and the interests of my supporters have plainly learned, I WON'T BACK DOWN IN THE BATTLE FOR JUSTICE.
Having experienced the relics of "smoke-filled back room" politics that mock the ideals of the modern Democratic Party, as well as the judicial system, I ask for your support of my candidacy for Judge of the Pennsylvania Superior Court.
Together, we can put these outdated, undemocratic, political tactics on the trash heap of history where they belong.
I thank you for your support.
Steve Irwin recently interviewed Bryan Neft for his show titled The Political Jungle.
They discussed Bryan's background growing up in the suburbs of Pittsburgh, his qualifications for the Superior Court, and his inspiration for going to law school.
His mom was a home economics teacher, and went to law school later in life when Bryan was already in high school. His mom's career change was his inspiration for attending law school, and recalls watching his mom participate in law class, study sessions, even driving her back and forth to school-related functions.
Checkout the video interview on Steve's YouTube channel, the Political Jungle.
The Superior Court of Pennsylvania was established in 1895 and is one of Pennsylvania's two statewide intermediate appellate courts. Cases are usually heard by panels of three judges sitting in Philadelphia, Harrisburg or Pittsburgh. The Superior Court also travels to locations throughout Pennsylvania to hear cases.
The PA Superior Court has always been one of the busiest appellate courts in the nation and fields over seven thousand appeals annually. It would not be unusual for each judge to write hundreds of decisions per year. That's in addition to the other work performed by Superior Court Judges which includes handling motions and reviewing wiretap applications.
As such, the work of the Superior Court requires a judge who can get to the heart of the issue quickly.
The Superior Court is responsible for appeals in criminal and most civil cases from the Courts of Common Pleas involving private parties. It also handles contract disputes, real estate disputes, criminal appeals, family law and juvenile matters.
It is often the final arbiter of legal disputes, and is sometimes referred to as the court of last resort. While the Supreme Court may grant a petition to review a decision, most petitions are denied and the ruling of the Superior Court stands. As such, the depth and breadth of the cases heard by the Superior Court can have a profound effect on the law, and the lives of every Pennsylvanian.