Legal DOC - MUST READ

This is a bit long - BUT A MUST READ


IN THE NORTHAMPTON COUNTY COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
CIVIL DIVISION-LAW
IN RE: PETITION FOR INITIATIVE TO PREVENT :
THE SALE AND/OR LEASE OF GRACEDALE : DOCKET NO:
FILED WITH NORTHAMPTON COUNTY ELECTIONS : 48-CV-2011-755
COMMISSION JANUARY 18, 2011 :
GRACEDALE INITIATIVE PETITION COMMITTEE’S MOTION FOR
REHEARING ON COSTS AND ATTORNEY FEES IN LIGHT OF NEWLY
FOUND EVIDENCE SUGGESTING IMPROPER GOVERNMENT FUNDING OF
THE PETITION TO SET ASIDE
Respondent Defendant Gracedale Initiative Petition Committee, by and through
its attorney, Lawrence M. Otter, Esquire respectfully requests a rehearing on its prior
motion for costs and attorney fees and says:
1. Respondent incorporates it prior motion for costs and attorney fees as if set forth
herein at length
2. On March 15, The Morning Call published an article which revealed for the first
time the illicit use of tax money authorized by the County Executive John Stoffa
and his minions to assist Objectors and “private citizens” O’Hare and Angle in
furtherance of the filing of their Petition to Set Aside the Initiative. See Exhibit A
attached here to - Did taxpayers fund Gracedale petition fight?
3. The article recounts various January 2011 billings by the law firm of Eckert
Seamans specifically for the review of petition signatures submitted to the Board
of Elections by GIPC. The labor intensive review of petition signatures for defects
is fundamental for any petition challenge. The firm billed for 80 hours of
signature reviews at a cost of $10,800.00.
1
4. This bill was approved by John Stoffa and paid by the County of Northampton.
5. Upon information and belief, at the March 3, 2011 hearing on the original motion
Mr. O’Hare testified under oath that there was no involvement by Eckert Seamans
in the preparation of the petition to set aside.
6. In response to the Morning Call article and counsel for GIPC’s comments to
WFMZ-TV, on March 17, Mr. O’Hare, published on his blog, Lehigh Valley
Ramblings the following:
Yesterday, the Otter engaged in a bit of litigation by news conference, telling
Channel 69, that he's calling on the DA, Attorney General and even the
frickin' Spanish Inquisition to break out the thumbscrews.
That's bad news for Stoffa, who already is missing a finger or two.
"This is the same case. People went to jail. I think the same thing might
happen here."
There 'ya have it.
Reporter Bo Koldcrow dutifully laps it all up, too, claiming that Bonusgate
"set a legal precedence [sic] that taxpayer dollars couldn't be spent on petition
challenges." Of course, that's nonsense. The County most certainly has every
right to spend taxpayer dollars to defend the Home Rule Charter, even from an
initiative petition. It also has every right to spend its resources in a nonpartisan
matter like the Gracedale initiative that directly affects the County, especially
when there's pervasive election fraud.
There's another little hole in Otter's theory. Not one cent of taxpayer
money ever funded my petition challenge. That litigation actually saved
taxpayers many thousands of dollars because it spared the County the
need to file its own signature challenge. (Emphasis added.).
7. Upon information and belief, Mr. O’Hare is not licensed to practice law in the
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania.
2
8. Upon information and belief, at all relevant times, John Stoffa had full knowledge
that Bernard O’Hare was not admitted to practice in Pennsylvania.
9. On April 20, 2011, the Morning Call published another story about the Gracedale
matter but this time it was based upon email correspondence between O’Hare,
Stoffa, Ron Angle, John Conklin and Mark Stewart Esquire. See Exhibit B
attached hereto.
10. The article states, inter alia:
Executive John Stoffa's administration and his lawyers worked with blogger Bernie
O'Hare on his and Councilman Ron Angle's failed attempt to keep Northampton
County voters from having a say on the sale of Gracedale nursing home.
An attorney from Eckert Seamans, the firm the county hired to help privatize
Gracedale, charged the county about $15,000 to revise Angle and O'Hare's court
challenge and to produce evidence submitted as Exhibit A in the challenge.
Angle and O'Hare have repeatedly said they did not collaborate with Eckert Seamans.
(See Exhibits C, D, E & F-various emails to and from Bernard O’Hare)
11. The article also quotes John Stoffa directly as follows:
"There was a hand-off like in football," Stoffa said. "The case was handed off to
Bernie. Bernie in my opinion saved the county taxpayers a lot of money by
pursuing that lawsuit on his own. It would have cost the county a lot more with
[Eckert Seamans'] time."
12. John Stoffa aided and abetted the unauthorized practice of law by having Bernard
O’Hare surreptiously represent the interests of the County in the Gracedale
Petition challenge. See: 42 Pa.C.S.A. § 2524 & 2525.
13. On January 20, 2011 at 11:46 PM , Eckert Seamans provided Bernard O’Hare
with a spread sheet that then became “EXHIBIT A” and was attached to his and
Angle’s petition to set aside the Initiative. See Exhibit D-email from B O’Hare
acknowledging receipt of spreadsheet.
14. On January 24, 2011 at 6:54PM significant revisions of the O’Hare Angle
Challenge petition were emailed from Mark Stewart to Bernie O’Hare. See
3
Exhibit E-email from Stewart to O’Hare. On information and belief, those
revisions and the “Exhibit A” spreadsheet were incorporated into the document
filed with this Court on January 25, 2011.
15. None of this information was known or available to respondents at the time of the
hearing on the original motion.
16. Upon information and belief, John Stoffa, Ron Angle, Bernard O’Hare, John
Conklin and others un named co conspirators agreed and conspired to use county
tax money to assist in the “private” challenge to the GIPC Initiative filed in this
Court on January 25, 2011 by O’Hare and Angle.
17. Upon information and belief, John Stoffa, Ron Angle, Bernard O’Hare, John
Conklin and others un named co conspirators knew or should have known that the
use of county tax money to assist in the O’Hare Angle Challenge is a
misappropriation of tax money. See: Exhibit G- Bonusgate Indictment pp 55-
59.
18. Upon information and belief, John Stoffa, Ron Angle and Bernard O’Hare were
less than candid with this Court in all the proceedings involving respondent GIPC.
WHEREFORE, in the interests of Justice, Gracedale Initiative Petition Committee
respectfully requests that this Honorable Court allow a rehearing on respondent’s request
for cost and attorney fees in light of the illegal use of tax money involved in this
challenge and hidden from both the respondents and the Court pursuant to 25 P.S. § 2937
and 42 PA.C.S.A. §2503.
4
Further Respondents seek an injunction to prevent Bernard O’Hare and Ron
Angle from any further unauthorized practice of law and the costs of this action pursuant
to 42 Pa.C.S.A. § 2524 (c).
Also, Respondents seek an injunction to prevent John Stoffa and any employee of
the County of Northampton, Pennsylvania to further aid and abet O’Hare and Angle
or any other non lawyer in the unauthorized practice of law and the costs of this
action pursuant to 42 Pa.C.S.A. § 2524 (c).
Respectfully submitted,
/S/ LAWRENCE M. OTTER
_______________________
LAWRENCE M. OTTER
ATTORNEY FOR GIPC
PO BOX 2131
Doylestown, PA 18901
215-230-5330
215-230-7197 (FAX)
e mail: larryotter@hotmail.com
5
EXHIBIT A
Did taxpayers fund Gracedale petition fight?
Law firm working for Northampton County reviewed signatures later challenged
privately by Ron Angle and Bernie O'Hare.
March 14, 2011|By Jenna Portnoy, OF THE MORNING CALL
A law firm Northampton County hired to help sell Gracedale nursing home spent 80
hours reviewing signatures filed by people hoping to block the sale. The names are on a
petition seeking to put the question before voters.
The January bill for work Eckert Seamans performed on behalf of county Executive John
Stoffa's administration describes time attorneys and others spent reviewing petitions for
discrepancies and defects.
Hourly rates vary depending on who completed the work, but 80 billable hours works out
to at least $10,800 in charges to taxpayers. The total bill is $71,826.
Most of the work in January had to do with the selection of a partnership of companies
with which Stoffa's staff is negotiating the terms of a sale. The firm reviewed the
petitions on Stoffa's behalf, he said, because he was considering filing a legal challenge
to the petition over the names.
Instead he challenged the referendum on other grounds — that putting the question of
selling Gracedale to voters would violate the county's home rule charter's ban on
questions regarding the budget and the capital plan. A judge tossed that suit, and Stoffa is
appealing to Commonwealth Court.
Ron Angle, as a citizen, not a county councilman, and blogger Bernie O'Hare challenged
the petition over its names. And the Eckert Seamans bill shows contact between the firm's
attorneys and both men.
County Controller Steve Barron objected to that contact. "It's clear the [Stoffa]
administration was working with the people who brought the private petition challenge,"
said Barron, an outspoken advocate for keeping Gracedale under county control.
The bill lists a phone call with O'Hare and three instances of contact with Angle, who
have said in public meetings they were not coached by Eckert Seamans attorneys.
"They call me and periodically give me updates on the sale of Gracedale," Angle said
Monday.
In one case, a description on the bill mirrors an aspect of Angle and O'Hare's case, which
was heard by county Judge Stephen Baratta.
6
Eckert Seamans completed "research [regarding] petition defects related to circulators'
errors," the bill shows, and O'Hare presented evidence in court showing people who
signed petitions as circulators delegated the responsibility to others.
"That was my lawsuit," O'Hare said, "and it was based on research that I did and that Ron
Angle participated in. There's absolutely no substance to the allegation that we were
spear carriers for Eckert Seamans."
7
EXHIBIT B
Did taxpayers help fund a private Gracedale lawsuit?
Eckert Seamans charged the county $15,000 for petition
challenge work.
• By Jenna Portnoy, OF THE MORNING CALL
10:50 p.m. EDT, April 19, 2011
mc-northampton-county-gracedale-coope20110419
Executive John Stoffa's administration and his lawyers worked with blogger Bernie O'Hare on his
and Councilman Ron Angle's failed attempt to keep Northampton County voters from having a
say on the sale of Gracedale nursing home.
An attorney from Eckert Seamans, the firm the county hired to help privatize Gracedale, charged
the county about $15,000 to revise Angle and O'Hare's court challenge and to produce evidence
submitted as Exhibit A in the challenge.
Angle and O'Hare have repeatedly said they did not collaborate with Eckert Seamans.
"Collaborating is too strong a word," O'Hare said on his blog on March 15. "They were conducting
their own investigation, and I spoke to them because we were both interested in the same thing.
But my work is my work and their work is theirs."
» Whitehall area community updates delivered to your mobile phone. Text WHITEHALL
to 52270! Message and data rates apply. Text STOP WHITEHALL to quit, text HELP for info
The Coalition of Alzheimer's Families, including relatives of Gracedale residents and unions
representing Gracedale workers, collected more than 23,000 signatures on 507 petitions in hopes
of putting a question on the spring ballot that, if successful, would block a sale for five years. The
petition drive spurred legal action from sale proponents.
Councilman Lamont McClure and coalition attorney Larry Otter said contact between O'Hare and
Eckert Seamans shows taxpayers helped pay for the petition challenge. The contact is confirmed
in emails provided by McClure, who requested them from the county.
"Taxpayer money did go to support a private lawsuit and while every bad decision is not a
crime," McClure said, "this tax money was misspent and should be reimbursed."
Stoffa said he sees nothing wrong with the contact, given the county's goal to sell the nursing
home.
"There was a hand-off like in football," Stoffa said. "The case was handed off to Bernie. Bernie in
my opinion saved the county taxpayers a lot of money by pursuing that lawsuit on his own. It
would have cost the county a lot more with [Eckert Seamans'] time."
In an interview, Angle said he doesn't use email and knows nothing about the emails O'Hare
exchanged with the county and its lawyers.
"If Bernie and Stoffa were on the same page with what they were doing, it would not be unusual
for them to share information," Angle said. "It would be proper protocol for [O'Hare] to share
with them and them to share with [O'Hare]."
O'Hare said he and Eckert Seamans attorney Mark Stewart were working toward a common goal.
O'Hare compared the contact to elected Controller Steve Barron talking to the coalition during the
court hearing.
"Taxpayer money did not fund this private litigation at all," O'Hare said. "An attorney who
represented the county shared information with me and I made my own decisions about what
8
information I would use and what information I would not use."
The night before O'Hare and Angle submitted their challenge, Stewart sent O'Hare an email,
copying Stoffa and Director of Administration John Conklin.
"Bernie/Again, great work," Stewart said in the Jan. 24 message, and promised he would send
O'Hare an email from his personal account with a "revised petition." He listed 10 specific
revisions to the document.
Stewart suggested adding a paragraph to strengthen O'Hare's argument that a petition
circulator's behavior "constitutes a pattern and practice of abuse and fraud" that should
invalidate all of the petitions she circulated. He also changed the title of the document, revised
language in several instances, corrected a typo, promised to send a case citation and adjusted
numbers.
In the same message, Stewart told O'Hare he would send him an updated version of Exhibit A, a
spreadsheet the firm produced after a painstaking review of hundreds of thousands of signatures
on petitions. The firm's January bill shows staff spent 83 hours reviewing signatures and
researching circulator errors for a cost of $14,786.
A few hours later O'Hare responded in part: "Mark, I really appreciate these suggestions, which
will make this a superior pleading." The message follows a Jan. 20 email O'Hare sent thanking
Stewart for the spreadsheet, which O'Hare called "some amazing research, more than I had
hoped to see."
As soon as it became clear to the administration that ACS, the county's information technology
contractor, could review petitions at no extra cost to taxpayers, Conklin said he told Eckert
Seamans to abandon its review. The work the firm had completed up to that point was compiled
in a spreadsheet that Stoffa said O'Hare was welcome to use.
"It was public information," Stoffa said. "We would have given it to anybody who asked for it."
County Judge Stephen Baratta did not grant enough of Angle and O'Hare's objections — which
focused mostly on circulator errors — to toss the referendum, and Commonwealth Court upheld
the ruling. The spreadsheet of 1,238 seemingly defective signatures did not play a significant role
in the case.
Stoffa said O'Hare's pursuit of the petition challenge allowed him to direct Eckert Seamans to
concentrate on researching whether the ballot referendum violated the home rule charter's ban
on budget matters.
"I thought the home rule charter question was much more important because it doesn't affect
just Northampton County," Stoffa said, "it affects every charter and every county in the country."
Baratta denied the charter challenge in mid-February, and Commonwealth Court upheld his
ruling. Stoffa said he will not pursue further appeals. The referendum will appear on the May 17
ballot.
Coalition attorney Otter said he believes Stoffa should not have used Eckert Seamans' labor to
review petitions, let alone support the private challenge. "He had no right to spend taxpayer
money for a purely partisan purpose," Otter said. "When you file a petition challenge, that's a
partisan purpose."
Stoffa said the payments were justified by a broadly worded council resolution authorizing him to
hire the firm "to facilitate and expedite all issues that will result in the alternate ownership of
Gracedale."
The contract is capped at $300,000 and so far the firm has billed the county about $164,000.
Council President John Cusick acknowledged council may bear some responsibility, but said he
did not envision the legal issues when he voted to hire the firm in October.
"The way that the administration went about this whole petition issue was confused, bungled,
and they didn't have a strategy to deal with it," he said. "We ought to just let the voters have a
say and move on."
jenna.portnoy@mcall.com
610-820-6586
9
IN THE NORTHAMPTON COUNTY COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
CIVIL DIVISION-LAW
IN RE: PETITITON FOR INITIATIVE TO PREVENT :
THE SALE AND/OR LEASE OF GRACEDALE : DOCKET NO:
FILED WITH NORTHAMPTON COUNTY ELECTIONS : 48-CV-2011-755
COMMISSION JANUARY 18, 2011 :
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
This is to certify that a copy of the attached Motion has been served on petitioners of
record as indicated below on April 28, 2011
By email only: BOHare5948@aol.com
Bernie O’Hare
68 South Main St
Nazareth, PA 18064
By email only: rangle@northamptoncounty.org &
Ron Angle
PO Box A
Portland, PA 18351
By email: klongrnbach@northamptoncounty.org
Karl F. Longenbach, Esquire
Northampton County Solicitor
Northampton County Courthouse
Easton, PA
By email only: spandoniesq@myway.com
Christopher Spadoni, Esquire
Election Commission Solicitor
Northampton County Courthouse
Easton, PA
/s/ Lawrence M. Otter, Esquire
______________________________
LAWRENCE M. OTTER, ESQUIRE