Scarnati Ordered to Pay Gerrymandering Challengers' Attorney Fees
A federal judge in Pennsylvania has ordered state Sen. Joseph Scarnati, R-Jefferson, to pay the League of Women Voters' attorney fees, finding the senator improperly removed the group's challenge over Pennsylvania's congressional map to federal court.
April 16, 2018 at 05:27 PM
3 minute read
A federal judge in Pennsylvania has ordered state Sen. Joseph Scarnati, R-Jefferson, to pay the League of Women Voters' attorney fees, finding the senator improperly removed the group's challenge over Pennsylvania's congressional map to federal court.
U.S. District Judge Michael Baylson of the Eastern District of Pennsylvania ordered Scarnati to personally pay $29,000 to the league's lawyers to cover the fees resulting from Scarnati's attempt to have the gerrymandering challenge litigated in federal court.
The league is represented by the Public Interest Law Center, which handled the case pro bono. However, the league argued its lawyers should be reimbursed for the time spent on the case. Baylson slashed the amount from the originally requested $52,000.
“The court finds that Senator Scarnati should personally be liable for these fees and costs,” Baylson wrote in his opinion. “The court has not located any federal law authority as to whether Senator Scarnati may be reimbursed.”
Scarnati removed the case to federal court from the Commonwealth Court where it was initially filed.
Michael Churchill of the Public Interest Law Center referred comment to the center's legal director, and Matthew Haverstick, who represents Scarnati, did not respond to a request for comment.
The law center's legal director, Mimi McKenzie, said the removal of the case to federal court was “frivolous” and said she was glad the court awarded fees.
In March, the U.S. Supreme Court and a federal appeals panel each rejected separate challenges brought by state Republicans aimed at invalidating the state's recently redrawn congressional map.
A specially convened three-judge panel of the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania ruled that several state and federal legislators did not have standing to bring claims over the map, and later Monday afternoon, the U.S. Supreme Court rejected a separate request to stay implementation of the new congressional district map, which the Pennsylvania Supreme Court issued in February.
The rulings come after several months of fighting over whether the Pennsylvania Supreme Court overstepped its authority when it determined the 2011 congressional map had been unconstitutionally gerrymandered, and then redrew the districts.
At the Supreme Court level, plaintiffs, who included Pennsylvania House of Representatives Speaker Mike Turzai, R-Allegheny, and Senate President Pro Tempore Scarnati, had sought an emergency stay of the new map. That request, made in Turzai v. League of Women Voters of Pennsylvania, was denied without explanation by the justices.
At the district court level, the specially convened panel found that state Senate Majority Leader Jake Corman, R-Centre, and state Sen. Mike Folmer, R-Lebanon, who is chair of the Senate's government committee, and eight members of the state's congressional delegation did not have standing to challenge the map. The ruling in Corman v. Torres dismissed the case.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllPhila. Jury Hits Sig Sauer With $11M Verdict Over Alleged Gun Defect
3 minute readEx-DLA Piper, Ballard Spahr Atty Accused of Aiding Video Game Company Founder's Misappropriation Scheme
5 minute readBosworth Claims It Was Kline & Specter, Not Him, That Breached Settlement Terms
4 minute readTrending Stories
- 1SEC Chair Gary Gensler to Resign on Trump's Inauguration Day
- 2How I Made Partner: 'Develop a Practice Area You Really Care About ,' Says Jennifer Gniady of Stradley Ronon
- 3Indian Billionaire Gautam Adani Indicted in Brooklyn for Alleged Orchestration of $250 Million Bribery Plot
- 4St. Ivo: Patron Saint of Lawyers
- 5Eagle Pharma Founder Sues Company to Recoup Cost of SEC Investigation
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250