Charles E Bellis III filed a nomination petition for Palmer Tp Supervisor. He's running as a Democrat against Ann Marie Panella. But on March 13, prominent Easton Attorney Theresa Hogan sought to have him tossed from the ballot in a challenge filed on behalf of Ruthann Arras, a Palmer Tp Democrat. Bellis filed no answer, failed to appear in court, and in fact told Attorney Hogan that he would not be appearing at a hearing that was held on March 16. I assumed that Bellis had thrown in the towel. But not Judge Craig Dally. Not only did he carefully review Hogan's challenge, but he actually dismissed it in an Opinion handed down on Tuesday.
Hogan's argument is that Bellis had to be rejected because he wanted to use the nickname "Zeke" but failed to complete and file an affidavit with Voting Registrar Dee Rumsey.
The problem with this argument advanced by Hogan is that the rule she recited is contained nowhere in the Election Code. It is simply the office policy of the elections office. And that policy contains no time limit on filing the affidavit.
Bellis, incidentally, has always been known as Zeke Bellis.
Though Ann Marie Panella may have been behind this challenge, it's not really her style.She was notably absent from the hearing on March 16.
Today's one-liner: "The shortest way to the distinguishing excellence of any writer is through his hostile critics." Richard LeGallienne
Local Government TV
▼
Wednesday, March 22, 2017
2 comments:
You own views are appreciated, especially if they differ from mine. But remember, commenting is a privilege, not a right. I will delete personal attacks or off-topic remarks at my discretion. Comments that play into the tribalism that has consumed this nation will be declined. So will comments alleging voter fraud unless backed up by concrete evidence. If you attack someone personally, I expect you to identify yourself. I will delete criticisms of my comment policy, vulgarities, cut-and-paste jobs from other sources and any suggestion of violence towards anyone. I will also delete sweeping generalizations about mainstream parties or ideologies, i.e. identity politics. My decisions on these matters are made on a case by case basis, and may be affected by my mood that day, my access to the blog at the time the comment was made or other information that isn’t readily apparent.
Good. It is about time that the courts speak to entitled power.
ReplyDeleteBernie, why would you call Attorney Hogan prominent? She didn't even read the election code. Why would she take this case if she didn't have time to brush up on the law?
ReplyDeleteI'm sure her client can't be happy with her.