White Plains CitizeNetReporter - 7 Weeks Later, AG Deliberates Delgado <i>quo warranto</i> Action.

WPCNR Dispatch News Courier. By John F. Bailey. May 9, 2002. 2:15 PM EDT: The Attorney General's Press Office reported to WPCNR Thursday that Larry Delgado's request for the Attorney General Elliot Spitzer to initiate a quo warranto proceeding to remove Glen Hockley from office as a "usurper" of his Common Council seat, is still under review by legal staff in the Attorney General's office in Albany.

Mark Violette, a spokesman for the Attorney General, told WPCNR the history of the request so far:

“Our office in late March received a request from Mr. Delgado to initiate a quo warranto proceeding on his behalf. That letter has been logged into our system and has been forwarded internally to the appropriate legal staff that is reviewing it, and determining what steps we should take in that regard. All the information I have on this issue is that our office has not reached a decision yet whether or not to proceed with a quo warranto matter for Mr. Delgado. We are contemplating it and deliberating it. When a decision is made we will let people know about that.”

WPCNR asked who was reviewing the matter and whether they had the election law expertise to evaluate the matter. Violette said he could not reveal the attorney reviewing the matter. He said, “We have a wide variety of legal experts,” and said the person reviewing it was “skilled” in this field.

Attorney General Has Necessary Information.

WPCNR asked Violette if the attorney(s) reviewing Mr. Delgado’s request had all the information they needed to make a decision. Violette said, “We have the necessary information and expertise to rule. If we need more information, we’ll certainly reach out to him (Mr. Delgado).”

Delgado not contacted for further information so far.

Asked how much longer the ruling to initiate or not initiate the action would take, Violette said, “As long as it takes. I’m not aware of any timetable. Our office is not working on a timetable. We are deliberating on how to proceed.”

Mr. Delgado’s attorneys, Jeffrey Binder and John Ciampoli, said they confirmed with the correspondence office that Mr. Delgado’s formal request for a quo warranto proceeding was received, but have had no contact from the Attorney General’s office in any form since sending the request.

Attorney General’s Office Works on a Triage System.

Violette explained to WPCNR that the Attorney General’s Office receives “thousands” of requests for the Attorney General to look into matters. He said that each request is reviewed and assigned, much like a hospital emergency room on a “triage” basis.

WPCNR asked what tier of triage “disputed elections” occupied in the view of the Attorney General’s Office, Violette said he did not know the answer. He said the officer assigning the cases “uses their judgment.”

Violette said he would get back to WPCNR on how many exact “thousands of cases” the attorney general’s office was working on right now, and how many cases they received weekly, monthly or yearly but he would find out.

Violette said they were aware of the nature of the case and its sensitivity to White Plains and the staff “was acting with deliberate speed on it.”

Court of Appeals Justices Concerned About Timing on a quo warranto Remedy Track.

The Attorney General’s Office has now had the Delgado matter in hand for seven weeks, three weeks longer than the Court of Appeals took to listen and weigh the arguments of Mr. Delgado and Mr. Hockley on the Appellate Court decision converting Judge Nicolai’s decision, calling for a new election citywide in White Plains.

When the Court of Appeals heard the arguments in the Delgado case, Justices Levine and Rosenblatt expressed concern on the time a plenary action, going to court, and perhaps having a jury trial would take to decide the winner of an election as opposed to seating an apparent winner immediately, and the aggrieved party relying on the Attorney General’s office to respond to a quo warranto action.

No “Heads-Up” from the Court of Appeals.

WPCNR asked Gary Spencer of the New York State Court of Appeals Press Office if the Court of Appeals, after they overturned the Delgado-Sunderland ruling, had notified the Attorney General’s Office of the possibility of a quo warranto request by Mr. Delgado coming Attorney General Elliot Spitzer’s way.

Mr. Spencer said “It’s not their role. I can tell you categorically they have not.”

Spencer said the Court of Appeals does not make it a practice of notifying other departments or branches of government of how to treat or be aware of sensitive decisions they have decided on. WPCNR was very specific. We asked Mr. Spencer if Court of Appeals Justices advise the Attorney General that he should “look into this” or “you better take a look at this,” or “Hey, Elliot this could be coming your way.” Mr. Spencer said “I can tell you categorically they have not.”

Appeals Decision Leaves Door Open.

The last paragraph of the decision written by the Court of Appeals reversing the Court of Appeals call for a new citywide election, reads , In sum, quo warranto is the appropriate remedy in this case. We need not determine at this time whether a declaratory judgment action might lie as an alternative remedy where quo warranto has ceased to be available to the aggrieved candidate because the Attorney General has declined to act.”

This intriguing sentence appears to leave open the possibility of future legal action by Mr. Delgado should the Attorney General decline to initiate a quo warranto procedure.


Create an account		The White Plains Daily Internet Newspaper...Founded 2000 A.D....


			Designed and hosted by WestchesterInternet.com