Larry Otter is a Doywlestown lawyer representing the Gracedale Initiative Petition Committee. He claims he's an election law expert worth $450 an hour. In addition to being paid by unions, he wanted to collect a gazillion dollars from Ron Angle, John Stoffa and yours truly.
I did offer to cut his grass, but he's an otter.
Northampton County Judge Steve Baratta originally denied attorney fees in this matter on March 4, 2011 because there simply "was no proof of any conduct that could be considered vexatious, in bad faith or otherwise improper." Otter never appealed that denial, but 52 days later, claimed there was "newly found evidence" of bad faith. He amended that petition in May, and then amended it again in June.
Then he withdrew one of these amendments.
Otter's "newly found evidence" is Eckert Seamans, a law firm hired to represent the County in expediting Gracedale's sale. Those lawyers billed the County for reviewing my proposed complaint and their suggestions. According to Otter, this is just like Bonusgate. Judge Baratta responded, "[w]e were unable to follow Counsel's analogy."
Otter nevertheless had us all going to jail in WFMZ-TV69 interviews and was demanding criminal investigations ... and money.
After listening to an Otter proffer of the evidence of our criminality, Judge Baratta concluded that, even if the County acted improperly, that has nothing to do with Angle or me. "[W]e found that such evidence is irrelevant to the issue before the Court related to proving vexatious, obdurate, dilatory or bad faith actions or motive on the part of the pro se litigants. We have already ruled that Mr. O'Hare and Mr. Angle raised legitimate and justiciable issues and further presented competent and compelling evidence challenging the legality of thousand signatures. In fact, Mr. O'Hare and Mr. Angle successfully established that thousands of signatures were invalid ... ."
In Commonwealth Court, I filed the briefest of briefs, just three sentences long, relying on Judge Baratta's decision.
It worked.
President Judge Dan Pellegrini quashed the appeal, which was filed 52 days after denial of one of Otter's sundry motions.
In a month or so, Otter and Barron von Footinmouth will try again.
Updated 9 PM: The Morning Call's Samantha Marcus has a report about today's decision. She speaks to everyone involved ... except for the two people who actually won. She reports that Otter now intends to seek a surcharge against Executive John Stoffa for the improper use of tax money, but fails to point out that Otter has already tried that, and failed.
Judge Baratta is right. You and Angle aren't really accountable on this. People should file a suit against the county since they acted very improperly by allowing a tax payed county employed law firm to bill taxpayers to assist you and Angle. Highly inappropriate behavior that should be pursued in court.
ReplyDeleteThe County did nothing wrong either. At this point, continued litigation is harassment.
ReplyDeleteGood on you, Bernie. What otters lack in intelligence and grace, they more than make up in persistence.
ReplyDeleteAtt'y Perkins, Thanks for all the insights provided along the way. I suspect the otter will be back to try again.
ReplyDeleteMr. Stoffa should be sued by the taxpayers for inappropriate use of county resources.
ReplyDeleteJust like you were tossed out on your ass when you were disbarred
ReplyDeleteright Bernie ?
Yeah, that's true. Otter was beaten by a disbarred lawyer.
ReplyDeleteContinued litigation is harrassment?
ReplyDeleteIf that is true, you and your buddy should have been charged with that a (and this is a really big number) gazzillion times.
Let's see. Over the past 10 years, I've filed about 6 lawsuits. That's not a gazillion. All of these suits were designed to promote good government. They resulted in changes in the way the Sunshine Act is followed as well as the way that municipal bonds are approved, promoting more transparency and accountability. I made no effort to benefit personally in any of them.
ReplyDeleteThis lawsuit was aimed at blatant election fraud. And though I fell short, I came close. If I had it to do over, I'd do it again.
Otter, in contrast, is in it for the money. I don't begrudge him that, except when he's got his hand in my pocket. He threatened us and attempted to intimidate us the second he was retained, and has made numerous frivolous appeals and arguments trying to soak us. He has tried his case in the press, claiming on local television that we're going to jail. His incessant frivolous motions, for which he has been sanctioned by courts in other matters, would easily provide a basis for a barratry claim.