Latest news with #PennsylvaniaRuleofJudicialAdministration1908
Yahoo
24-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Gaughan, county appealing court ruling in vacancy case
Lackawanna County and Democratic Commissioner Bill Gaughan are appealing a county judicial panel's ruling that the county's Home Rule Charter controls the process of filling former Democratic Commissioner Matt McGloin's vacant seat. Gaughan and the county, co-petitioners in litigation challenging the charter process, are also appealing the panel's ruling that the county lacks authority to proceed as a party in the legal matter. With Senior Judges Carmen D. Minora and Vito P. Geroulo in the majority and Senior Judge Robert A. Mazzoni dissenting, the three-judge panel ruled Thursday that the charter supersedes a state rule of judicial administration that would have removed the county Democratic Committee from the replacement process. It amounted to a legal victory for the committee, which the charter tasks with playing a major role in filling vacancies when a Democratic commissioner or other elected Democratic county row officer leaves office mid-term. Attorneys for Gaughan and the county filed a notice Friday in county court stating the parties are appealing the ruling in Commonwealth Court. The Scranton law firm Myers, Brier & Kelly filed the notice as part of its standing engagement, county spokesman Patrick McKenna said in an email, nothing there will be no further cost associated with the appeal. The HRC specifically tasks the Democratic Committee with submitting the names of three potential candidates to fill the vacancy for consideration by the commissioned judges of the county Court of Common Pleas, and the judges with appointing McGloin's successor from that short list. That process played out controversially in late February when the committee held a closed-door vote to submit former county Economic Development Director Brenda Sacco, Olyphant Borough Council President James Baldan and Scranton School Director Robert J. Casey as potential appointees. Gaughan and the county challenged the charter process in March, arguing it violates Pennsylvania Rule of Judicial Administration 1908. That rule, adopted by the state Supreme Court in 2019, says the county court alone, not a political party, 'shall receive applications from any interested candidates for the position' pursuant to a deadline established by the court. Both sides made their respective cases in court filings and during oral arguments before the panel, with the committee arguing for the supremacy of the charter and Gaughan and the county for Rule 1908. Minora and Geroulo ultimately ruled the charter process supersedes the rule of judicial administration, writing that Gaughan and the county's reading of Rule 1908 'simply defies logic and means every time the court issues a new rule, be it administrative or procedural, HRC communities better hold their breath lest their constitutionally guaranteed right to self-rule be consumed … by a pac-man like anonymous rule making committee unanswerable to any public input.' Mazzoni, dissenting, wrote that the 'clear and unambiguous language in Rule 1908 … makes its application in this case compelling.' 'As noted in the language of Rule 1908, the application of this Rule makes the selection of a candidate more transparent and, of course, more diverse by creating a larger pool of worthy applicants,' Mazzoni wrote. 'A result which truly serves the ends of justice.' The senior judges spoke in one voice on another element of the case, unanimously ruling that the county lacks authority to proceed as a party to the matter while rejecting the claim that county Solicitor Donald Frederickson can commence and prosecute litigation on behalf of the county without authorization from a majority of the commissioners. The county has no authority to proceed because Republican Commissioner Chris Chermak, one of two sitting commissioners, never authorized the county's participation, per the ruling. Attorneys for Chermak — who himself objected to the use of county personnel, resources and taxpayer money to make the legal challenge — had argued in court against the county's participation for that reason. The senior judges did, however, rule that Gaughan has standing to proceed in his official capacity as commissioner since he has a substantial, direct and immediate interest in the case. 'The employment of an appropriate selection process can have an impact on Gaughan's ability to function as a Commissioner,' they wrote. The ruling notes that Chermak also has standing as a commissioner. County President Judge James Gibbons has not provided specific details or a timeline on how the county judges might proceed in light of Thursday's ruling, now being appealed, which orders them to 'follow the directives of the Home Rule Charter' when filling McGloin's seat. 'We will provide information as it becomes available,' Gibbons said in an email. Reached Friday morning, Frederickson said the appeal will stay Thursday's county court ruling pending a ruling from the appellate court. The notice of appeal filed Friday is not the appeal itself, which will be filed at a later date. County Democratic Chairman Chris Patrick declined to comment on the appeal beyond saying 'they have to do whatever they have to do.'
Yahoo
23-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Court gives ruling on vacant Commissioner's seat
SCRANTON, LACKAWANNA COUNTY (WBRE/WYOU)— A decision on how to proceed with filling the Lackawanna County Commissioner Vacancy was announced in a ruling. In that ruling, the judges voted 2-1 in favor of siding with the Lackawanna County Democratic Committee that the vacancy of the County Commissioner seat should be filled in line with the Home Rule Charter instead of Pennsylvania Rule of Judicial Administration 1908, proposed by Commissioner Gaughan. The Home Rule Charter states that Court of Common Pleas of Lackawanna County shall choose from the three names submitted by the Lackawanna County Democratic Committee (LCDC). The Pennsylvania Rule of Judicial Administration 1908 states that when a court is filling vacancies to an elected official under a statutory duty, The Court shall receive applications from any interested candidates prior to the deadline established. The LCDC will now proceed with taking applications and choosing the best three and passing them onto the Court of common Pleas to make a final decision on the candidates. Commissioner Gaughan provided a brief statement saying: ''We have just received the opinions. We're reviewing them and will decide soon how to proceed.' The Court also ruled unanimously to take Lackawanna County off Commissioner Gaughan's lawsuit, meaning the county would not have to pay for it with taxpayer's money. Commissioner Chermak released a statement stating: 'I am pleased with the unanimous decision by the Lackawanna County judges to remove Lackawanna County and the County Solicitor from Commissioner Gaughan's lawsuit. I fought to have the county removed from this suit because the taxpayers of Lackawanna County should not be responsible for paying for a fight between Bill Gaughan and the Democrat Party of Lackawanna County. First and foremost, I will always fight for the taxpayers of Lackawanna County. This why I strongly opposed the 33% tax increase and continue to monitor the ongoing reassessment to make sure it is fair, accurate and transparent. This ruling protects taxpayer funds, and I remain dedicated to advocating for fiscal responsibility in our county. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
23-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Majority of judges rule Home Rule Charter prevails in vacancy fight
The Lackawanna County Home Rule Charter's process for filling former Commissioner Matt McGloin's vacant seat supersedes a state rule of judicial administration that would have removed the county Democratic Committee from the replacement process, the majority of a panel of senior county judges ruled. While split on that question, the panel unanimously ruled that the county — which as a co-petitioner brought litigation challenging the charter process alongside Democratic Commissioner Bill Gaughan — does not have the authority to proceed as party in the matter. Republican Commissioner Chris Chermak and his attorneys had argued against the county's right to do so or participate in the case at all, since Chermak, one of two sitting commissioners, never authorized the county's participation. Thursday's ruling comes a month after the panel of Senior Judges Carmen D. Minora, Vito P. Geroulo and Robert A. Mazzoni heard oral arguments in the litigation Gaughan and the county initiated in March seeking to remove the county Democratic Committee from the process of replacing McGloin, a Democratic commissioner who resigned and left office in late February. Objecting to the HRC process the committee followed in nominating three potential replacements — former county Economic Development Director Brenda Sacco, Olyphant Borough Council President James Baldan and Scranton School Director Robert J. Casey — attorneys for Gaughan and the county argued in court that the HRC procedure violated Pennsylvania Rule of Judicial Administration 1908, adopted by the state Supreme Court in 2019. The Democratic Committee rejected that argument, arguing in court for the supremacy of the charter. Lackawanna County Commissioner Bill Gaughan speaks during the commissioners' meeting held at the county Government Center in Scranton Wednesday, April 16, 2025. (SEAN MCKEAG / STAFF PHOTOGRAPHER) The HRC tasks the Democratic Committee with submitting the names of three potential candidates to fill the vacancy for consideration by the judges of the county Court of Common Pleas, and the judges with appointing McGloin's successor from that short list. Rule 1908, on the other hand, says the county court alone, not a political party, 'shall receive applications from any interested candidates for the position' pursuant to a deadline established by the court. Minora and Geroulo ruled that the charter supersedes Rule 1908, with Mazzoni dissenting. The majority ruling amounts to a legal victory for the county Democratic Committee. 'The logic behind the entire HRC concept is to provide HRC municipalities with power at the local level to govern at the local level,' Minora and Geroulo wrote in their ruling, which notes Gaughan and the county's reading of Rule 1908 'simply defies logic and means every time the court issues a new rule, be it administrative or procedural, HRC communities better hold their breath lest their constitutionally guaranteed right to self-rule be consumed … by a pac-man like anonymous rule making committee unanswerable to any public input.' In his dissent, Mazzoni disagreed that the HRC controls the replacement process, noting the 'clear and unambiguous language in Rule 1908 … makes its application in this case compelling.' He also reiterated a point he made in court last month that the matter appears to be a case of first impression, meaning the issue before the court hadn't been addressed before. In other words, no court had been asked to decide whether Rule 1908 supersedes a HRC when there's an inconsistency between the charter and Rule 1908. 'As noted in the language of Rule 1908, the application of this Rule makes the selection of a candidate more transparent and, of course, more diverse by creating a larger pool of worthy applicants,' Mazzoni wrote. 'A result which truly serves the ends of justice.' Gaughan raised transparency concerns both before and after the Democratic Committee submitted Sacco, Baldan and Casey for the judges' consideration, blasting the way the committee went about nominating those three from a larger pool of 18 candidates as opaque and politically tainted. County Democratic Chairman Chris Patrick repeatedly defended his process as complying with the charter. 'We just received the ruling and we're currently reviewing it and we will decide very soon on how to proceed,' Gaughan said Thursday. Patrick said his committee stood behind the charter from the beginning. 'We knew it was the right and legal process,' he said. 'At the end of the day I'm just thankful that the senior judges ruled and decided to defend the integrity of the Home Rule Charter. … As far as I'm concerned it's time to move on. There's been enough fighting. There's been enough name calling.' How and when the county court judges might proceed with the three potential appointees before them remains to be seen, but the majority ruling 'orders the commissioned judges that the active court follow the directives of the Home Rule Charter' when voting to fill McGloin's seat. Standing The senior judge panel's ruling on the issue of standing and the county's continued participation in the legal matter was unanimous, with all three finding the county lacks authority to proceed as a party to the litigation. They also rejected the claim that county Solicitor Donald Frederickson can commence and prosecute litigation on behalf of the county without authorization from a majority of the commissioners, but ruled that Gaughan does have standing to proceed in his official capacity as commissioner. 'To permit a single commissioner without majority concurrence to unilaterally proceed in the name of the County would lead to chaotic results infused with political agendas this Court is not willing to sanction,' the judges wrote. Chermak had objected to the use of county resources and personnel in, and taxpayer money to fund, the legal battle. He said in a statement he was pleased with the judges' unanimous decision to remove the county from the litigation. Lackawanna County Commissioner Chris Chermak listens during the commissioners' meeting held at the county Government Center in Scranton Wednesday, April 16, 2025. (SEAN MCKEAG / STAFF PHOTOGRAPHER) 'I fought to have the county removed from this suit because the taxpayers of Lackawanna County should not be responsible for paying for a fight between Bill Gaughan and the Democrat Party of Lackawanna County,' he said. In permitting Gaughan in his capacity as commissioner to proceed, the judges found he has a substantial, direct and immediate interest in the case. 'The employment of an appropriate selection process can have an impact on Gaughan's ability to function as a Commissioner,' they wrote. 'Without Gaughan's challenge, he would be conceding to a selection process which he feels is unconstitutional.' Whether Gaughan appeals the ruling remains to be seen.
Yahoo
23-04-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Judges hear oral arguments in legal fight over McGloin vacancy
SCRANTON — A panel of senior Lackawanna County judges heard oral arguments Tuesday in the legal battle Democratic Commissioner Bill Gaughan and the county initiated last month seeking to remove the Lackawanna County Democratic Committee from the process of replacing former Democratic Commissioner Matt McGloin. Senior county Judges Carmen D. Minora, Robert A. Mazzoni and Vito P. Geroulo, who are collectively presiding over the legal matter, also heard arguments as to whether Gaughan and the county have standing to bring the civil case, whether county solicitor Donald Frederickson required authorization from a majority of commissioners to commence the litigation and whether the county should be removed as a party to it altogether. Tuesday's proceedings came more than a month after Frederickson and attorneys with the Scranton law firm Myers, Brier & Kelly filed a petition on behalf of Gaughan and the county asking the county Court of Common Pleas to amend a March 6 order on the process of replacing McGloin, who resigned in late February. Those parties specifically seek an amendment bringing the March 6 order into compliance with Pennsylvania Rule of Judicial Administration 1908, which would effectively remove the county Democratic Committee from the process of filling McGloin's seat for the almost three years remaining on his unexpired term. Lackawanna County Majority Commissioner Matt McGloin speaks during the budget hearing in the Lackawanna County Government Center in Scranton Wednesday, Nov. 20, 2024. The March 6 order signed by former county President Judge Trish Corbett maintained a replacement procedure established by the county's Home Rule Charter that tasks the Democratic Committee with providing the names of three potential appointees for consideration by the judges of the county court. The HRC process played out in late February when county Democratic Party leaders used a scoring rubric to narrow a list of 18 applicants to three finalists — former county economic development Director Brenda Sacco, Olyphant Borough Council President James Baldan and Scranton School Director Robert J. Casey — before the executive committee voted to advance those candidates to the judges. Corbett's order reset the clock on that process, giving the party five days from the date of the order to furnish the court with three potential appointees. County Democratic Party Chairman Chris Patrick resubmitted the same three names to the court the next day. By maintaining the HRC process, Gaughan and the county contend the March 6 order violated Pennsylvania Rule of Judicial Administration 1908, adopted by the state Supreme Court in 2019, which says the county court, not a political party, 'shall receive applications from any interested candidates for the position' pursuant to a deadline established by the court. President Judge James Gibbons, who succeeded Corbett as president judge March 17, paused the process of replacing McGloin pending resolution of the legal challenge. He also assigned the matter to the panel of senior judges Minora, Mazzoni and Geroulo. Before hearing arguments on the merits of the case — whether the process established by the HRC or the alternative process pursuant to Rule 1908 controls the replacement — the judges heard arguments for and against Republican Commissioner Chris Chermak's effort to remove the county as a party to the litigation. Chermak is opposed to the use of taxpayer money or county personnel to argue what he's described as a 'Bill Gaughan issue,' not a county issue. Representing Chermak on Tuesday were attorneys Paul J. LaBelle, the county's minority solicitor, and Howard Rothenberg. They contend Gaughan as a commissioner and the county lacked the authority to initiate the litigation without Chermak's approval. Attorney Adam Bonin, representing the county Democratic Committee, also argued that Gaughan lacks standing as a commissioner, as he can't be appointed to the vacant seat by virtue of the fact that he's already a sitting commissioner. Lackawanna County minority solicitor Paul J. LaBelle has a conversation next to county Solicitor Donald Frederickson before the commissioners' meeting in the county Government Center on Wednesday, April 16, 2025. (SEAN MCKEAG / STAFF PHOTOGRAPHER) Attorney Dan Brier of the MBK firm, representing Gaughan and the county, argued among other points that Frederickson as county solicitor had a statutory duty to bring the litigation because the county has a legal interest in the matter. That interest, Frederickson said after the court session, is getting the appointment process right. Gaughan also has an immediate, direct and substantial interest in that respect, his attorneys contend. Rothenberg argued that the petitioners were confusing the concepts of duty and authority. Frederickson as the solicitor 'may have duties,' Rothenberg said, 'but he needs authority to act' — authority Chermak never granted. Chermak and his attorneys didn't take a position on the question of whether the Home Rule Charter or Rule 1908 should control the process of filling McGloin's vacant seat — a question Brier and Bonin addressed at length. The former argued that Rule 1908, adopted by the state Supreme Court, trumps the HRC, pointing to a section of the state constitution addressing judicial administration. That section gives the state Supreme Court the power to 'prescribe general rules of governing practice, procedure and the conduct of all courts' and notes that all laws 'shall be suspended to the extent that they are inconsistent with rules prescribed under these provisions.' Because the HRC process is inconsistent with Rule 1908, it should be suspended and superseded by Rule 1908 on constitutional grounds, Brier contends. But Bonin contends the question of how to fill a vacancy on the Lackawanna County Board of Commissioners is not a judicial matter, but a legislative one — essentially a policy decision — that Lackawanna County voters made when they adopted the HRC decades ago. The HRC as adopted by voters gives the county court the power to choose from a list of three candidates the Democratic Committee provides, but who those three candidates are is not up to the court, Bonin said. In adopting the HRC, county voters made a legislative choice empowering the county Democratic Committee to play that role in the replacement process, he argued. While the panel of judges didn't issue a ruling Tuesday, Mazonni noted that the matter 'appears to be a case of first impression,' meaning the issue before the court hasn't been addressed before. In other words, no court has been asked to decide whether Rule 1908 supersedes a home rule charter when there's an inconsistency between the charter and Rule 1908. As such, the panel's pending ruling will set a precedent, however the judges ultimately rule.
Yahoo
18-04-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Bolus sues over Lackawanna County commissioner vacancy
Scranton resident Bob Bolus entered the legal fray over the filling of a Lackawanna County commissioner vacancy. Bolus filed a lawsuit April 10 in Lackawanna County Court against Democratic Lackawanna County Commissioner Bill Gaughan that seeks to bar him from having county-paid legal representation in pending litigation over the vacancy of former Commissioner Matt McGloin. Gaughan and the county initiated litigation last month seeking to remove the Lackawanna County Democratic Committee from the process of replacing McGloin, a Democrat who resigned in late February. The vacancy litigation pits Gaughan/the county against the Lackawanna County Democratic Committee over whether the vacancy should be filled pursuant to the county's Home Rule Charter or a state court rule. The charter process had the Democratic Committee picking three candidates to forward to county judges, who then would select one to fill the McGloin vacancy. The Gaughan/county challenge to the charter process claims it is trumped by Pennsylvania Rule of Judicial Administration 1908 of 2019, which says the county court — not a political party — shall receive applications from any interested candidates for the position. Lackawanna County Senior Judges Carmen Minora, Robert Mazzoni and Vito Geroulo sitting as a panel will hear oral arguments Tuesday in the vacancy litigation. The lawsuit by Bolus, a Republican, raises arguments similar to those of Republican Lackawanna County Commissioner Chris Chermak — mainly that Gaughan acted unilaterally and if he wants to pursue the litigation, he should do so individually, with his own personal attorney and pay for his own legal bills. County Comissioner Chris Chermak listens to commissioner Bill Gaughan's comments at the conclusion of the Lackawanna County commissioners meeting at the Lackawanna County Government Center in Scranton on Wednesday, March 19, 2025. (REBECCA PARTICKA/STAFF PHOTOGRAPHER) Bolus has been a vocal critic of Gaughan for years and has portrayed him as a cartoon skunk on a tractor-trailer festooned with political messages. Bolus filed his lawsuit on a 'pro-se' basis, meaning without an attorney, and as a tort against Gaughan, and not as part of the vacancy litigation. Seeking a judgment in excess of $50,000, Bolus also filed on April 11 a companion petition for a preliminary injunction to stop Gaughan from using taxpayer funds to litigate the vacancy issue. 'By the time a civil case is litigated, the tax payer funds will have have been spent already,' Bolus' petition for an injunction says. As of Thursday afternoon, the court had not taken any action on Bolus' injunction petition. Whether he has legal standing to pursue such a lawsuit or whether it follows rules of civil procedure, or whether it might be rendered moot if the vacancy dispute is resolved first, all remain to be seen. Gaughan also had not yet formally responded in court to Bolus' lawsuit. In a phone interview Thursday, Gaughan said: 'I did receive it and I had a very, very good chuckle, a good laugh. I don't take Bob Bolus seriously at all. He's a fruit fly. He's a nuisance to society and this will most likely get dismissed, like almost every other lawsuit he's had.' Bolus argues he has legal standing to pursue the lawsuit as a property owner, resident and taxpayer in the county. Last week, the panel of judges did not allow the Democratic Committee's top candidate, former county economic development Director Brenda Sacco, to enter the vacancy litigation as an intervenor, ruling that she has no legal standing in the matter and her interests are adequately represented by the committee. The Democratic Committee also contends that Gaughan and the county lack legal standing to pursue the vacancy litigation. But Gaughan and the county reject that claim, citing law giving municipalities and their officials standing to challenge the constitutionality of actions affecting their government functions and interests.
