By ALEX ROSE arose@delcotimes.com

Springfield Republican Rick Lacey filed an amended complaint in federal court Wednesday against Delaware County Sheriff Joseph McGinn and several of his deputies, as well as the county Board of Elections and its director, Laureen Hagan.

The complaint stems from an April 21, 2008, preliminary injunction entered by Delaware County Common Pleas Court President Judge Joseph Cronin that forbade Lacey and fellow plaintiff Ryan Hodinka, also of Springfield, from distributing campaign literature during last year’s primary election.

Lacey and Hodinka were seeking positions as alternate delegates to the Republican National Convention. The literature in question was a sample ballot purported to be “paid for by the candidates.”

Barbara Harvey of Broomall and Alana Cervino of Springfield brought the request for injunction against the 10 individuals appearing on that literature. Cronin deemed the material fraudulent because it did not comply with state campaign disclosure laws for elective office.

Lacey alleges in this complaint that he was not served notice prior to the noon hearing April 21 and was not present because he had no knowledge of the suit, in violation of state rules of civil procedure.

On April 22, Lacey and Hodinka successfully argued before Common Pleas Court Judge Chad Kenney that candidates for political office need not comply with disclosure laws laid out in the Pennsylvania Election Code. Kenney vacated the previous order.

Lacey, along with fellow plaintiffs Hodinka, Nancy Ricca and Rudy Ricca, now allege the injunction was “an abuse of power because it lacked probable cause, was legally unwarranted and violated the First and Fourth amendments of the U.S. Constitution.”

Though the injunction ordered the defendants to collect the literature from polling places and deliver it to the Board of Elections, Lacey alleges Hagan directed McGinn to dispatch deputies to various polling places in the county and seize the materials in question, as well as informational sample ballots and literature prepared by the Riccas, who were running for positions as GOP committee people.

The plaintiffs claim the deputies’ actions at the direction of McGinn and Hagan deprived them of their constitutionally guaranteed rights to freedom of speech and freedom from unwarranted search and seizure, which caused irreparable harm, mental suffering and emotional distress.

The plaintiffs have demanded a jury trial and are seeking $200,000 in compensatory damages; a judgment declaring the defendants’ actions constituted a violation of the plaintiffs’ constitutional rights; injunctive relief enjoining the defendants from any future interference with the plaintiffs’ rights; and reasonable fees and costs, as well as any other relief the court deems proper.

The defendants filed a motion to dismiss the case after the initial complaint was filed Dec. 5, 2008, but were unsuccessful. In that motion, the defendants argued neither McGinn nor Hagan were involved in the April 21 Common Pleas Court action and could not be liable for abuse of process.

The defendants further argued the plaintiffs failed to show McGinn or Hagan had any personal involvement in the incident and that the plaintiffs failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted.

Jan E. DuBois, senior district judge for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, denied the motion without prejudice last month and directed the plaintiffs to file an amended complaint.

DuBois also ordered the case be placed on the court’s Dec. 18 trial list.

Any motions for summary judgment are due by Sep. 3. Summary judgment is appropriate where there are no material issues of fact to be tried.
Comments