Luzerne County District Attorney Sam Sanguedolce said Wednesday he was surprised county council is withdrawing from litigation over the timing of the DA election because the underlying issues have not yet been adjudicated.
“The only issue decided was whether the court would issue a preliminary injunction to stop the election as invalid or to declare the term prior to a full hearing on the issues,” Sanguedolce said Wednesday.
Sanguedolce and council had filed the legal action against the five-citizen election board in August over differing interpretations of a new state statute that kicked in when Sanguedolce filled the DA seat vacated by Stefanie Salavantis in March.
This legislation requires the first assistant DA to serve “until the first Monday in January following the next municipal election” that occurs at least 90 days after the vacancy.
An election board majority concluded the race had to be on the Nov. 2 ballot because that was the next municipal election, and it set a two-year term to match when Salavantis’ term would have been over.
The council/DA suit asserted the race could not be held until the next odd-numbered municipal election year — 2023 — for a four-year term so county voters would have an opportunity to select nominees in a primary election.
Visiting Chester County Senior Judge Robert J. Shenkin denied the council/DA’s preliminary injunction attempting to remove the race from the Nov. 2 ballot, and Commonwealth Court upheld Shenkin’s decision in late October.
Sanguedolce, a Republican, ran unopposed and was the top vote-getter in countywide races. The county’s Democratic Party did not nominate a candidate.
Because the Commonwealth Court appeal focused solely on the preliminary injunction, the council/DA suit is still pending before Shenkin. The election board argued the court can void the DA election result if the court ultimately decides after adjudication that a Nov. 2 election for DA was incorrect.
Council voted Tuesday to end its use of Stevens & Lee after the law firm files paperwork discontinuing council’s involvement in the county litigation. Several council members have said they were increasingly concerned about spending more legal funds pursuing the matter. Council ended up paying Stevens & Lee $33,000 in legal expenses.
Proceeding with the case will determine whether the new law required the election and the term length of two or four years, Sanguedolce said.
The DA said he has not discussed next steps with his legal counsel because they are waiting for the court record to be returned from Commonwealth Court.