Three Lackawanna County judges expressed sustained skepticism today about a court challenge to insurance executive Chuck Volpe's push for a ballot question asking voters if they want to study creating a new form of county government.
Attorney Frank J. Tunis Jr., a lawyer for county resident Andrea Benford, who is challenging Mr. Volpe's petitions to put the question on the May 21 primary election ballot, argued her challenge was specific enough because it questions all 6,101 signature on ballot question petitions filed by Mr. Volpe and his supporters.
"They've been put on notice that we're challenging all of them," Mr. Tunis said. "We think the seminal issue here is notice."
Not really, said attorney Frank J. Ruggiero, Mr. Volpe's lawyer. The issue is whether the challenge is specific enough. State law, backed up by a 1990 state Supreme Court ruling, requires a challenger to list the "page, line and reason" a signature is invalid, Mr. Ruggiero said.
"This cannot be a fishing expedition," Mr. Ruggiero said. "Clearly, under every case I've read, you have to be specific."
The validity of signatures - whether the person whose name appears on a petition actually signed it and signed it legally - is important because Mr. Volpe needs a certain minimum number of signatures for the question to be placed on the ballot. Mr. Volpe says that number is 3,490, but one challenge says it's twice that.
Attorney Janine Pavalone, the lawyer for three notaries who work for Mr. Volpe, notarized many of his ballot question petitions and were subpoenaed to testify at another hearing on the matter scheduled for Monday, made a similar argument. She said Mr. Tunis never explained why he subpoenaed the notaries, which left her unable to prepare her clients to testify.
She called the subpoena "oppressive" and "embarrassing" to her clients.
Mr. Tunis denied that is true and argued Ms. Pavalone should have no trouble preparing her clients because they know the proper ways to notarize documents.
President Judge Thomas J. Munley and Judges Terrence R. Nealon and Vito P. Geroulo seemed to have little patience for Mr. Tunis' arguments. Over and over, they questioned the lack of specificity in citing why a signature was invalid.
"This is not just a fishing expedition, but it's a fleet going out to fish," Judge Geroulo said.
Judge Munley said the judges would rule later today.
Contact the writer: bkrawczeniuk@timesshamrock.com