Lawyer donations debated

By Terrie Morgan-Besecker tmorgan@timesleader.comLaw & Order Reporter

WILKES-BARRE – Should candidates for local judicial offices accept campaign contributions from attorneys?

Additional Photos Below

It’s a thorny issue that continues to dog judicial elections in Luzerne County and elsewhere as candidates weigh the need to raise cash against the concern the public will perceive the courts are for sale.

In Luzerne County, 13 of the 16 candidates who are seeking six open seats in the May 17 primary election have opted to accept attorney donations.

The candidates, all attorneys, say their contemporaries should be free to support whomever they choose, and to block them from doing so would essentially disenfranchise them.

But for the three candidates who have rejected attorney donations – Mike Blazick, Molly Hanlon Mirabito and Lesa Gelb -- the issue is trust within the court system.

That trust can’t be restored if there’s any question that a judge’s impartiality might be impacted by contributions, they say.

$5,021 the largest donation

A Times Leader review of campaign finance reports filed with the state and county shows that a total of $58,571 in individual contributions of more than $250 have been donated by attorneys to 11 of the 13 judicial candidates as of May 6, the last reporting date.

The newspaper did not include figures for individual donations of less than $250 because, unlike those over $250, campaign finance reports do not indicate the occupation of the donors.

The candidate who received the most donations from attorneys is Richard “Dick” Hughes, who took in $13,150. He was followed by Fred Pierantoni, with $10,150; and Joseph Saporito, with $9,400.

Donations to the eight others ranged from $500 to roughly $7,500.

The total amount of attorney contributions to the two other candidates, Vito DeLuca and Jim McMonagle, could not be calculated because they did not receive any individual donations over $250.

The records show that, all told, more than 70 attorneys, nearly all of whom practice in Luzerne and/or Lackawanna counties, made contributions of more than $250. The majority donated $500 to $1,000, with the biggest single contribution coming from attorney Vincent Cappellini, who donated $5,021 to candidate Jennifer Rogers.

Scranton attorney John Dean of Elliott Greenleaf and Dean and the law firm of Dougherty Leventhal and Price in Kingston were the second- and third-largest individual contributors.

Dean donated a total of $6,000 to three candidates, while DLP and one of its owners, Pat Dougherty, gave a total of $3,500 to six candidates.

Cappellini’s donation to Rogers was personal and professional, as he has been dating Rogers for the past three years, he said. On a professional level, he said he believes Rogers has both the “heart and talent” to make an excellent judge.

He will not practice before her.

Dean’s contributions to Hughes, Mark Bufalino and Paula Radick were also based on his professional and personal relationships with the candidates, he said. Bufalino and Radick are employed by Dean’s law firm, while Hughes is a close personal friend. Dean has also committed to not practicing before Bufalino, Radick or Hughes.

Candidate reviews

Pat Dougherty said his firm, which donated to Hughes, Pierantoni, Saporito, Rogers, Joe Sklarosky Jr. and Michael Vough, made its selections based on a thorough review of the candidates’ qualifications.

“We are looking to get qualified individuals on the bench, just like the general public. Money, unfortunately, is needed to have the public become aware of these individuals,” Dougherty said.

Hughes, Saporito, Pierantoni and several of the other candidates interviewed said they’ve made it clear that campaign contributions will not impact their impartiality. They said they would willingly disclose the identity and amounts of their contributors to any litigants who come before them.

“Anyone who comes before me, I will make sure there is full disclosure,” Hughes said. “I’ll keep a list of my contributors in my chambers, and if either side believes there is an issue, they can raise it. But I can assure you, anyone who comes in my courtroom will get a level playing field.”

Saporito said he realizes some members of the public remain skeptical, but he believes it’s wrong to deny attorneys the right to support a candidate based on their profession.

“Just as justice is for all, so is the political process,” Saporito said. “To deny someone access to the political process based on their occupation is patently unfair.”

Like other candidates who accepted attorney contributions, Hughes, Saporito and Pierantoni said they’re confident in their ability to be fair and impartial regardless of donations.

Public perception

The three attorneys who rejected contributions said that might very well be true. The problem is that’s not the public’s perception.

“People equate money in the courtroom with bias and impropriety,” Gelb said. “We need to make sure there is no appearance of impropriety whatsoever.”

Hanlon Mirabito said she understands the concerns that precluding attorneys from donating to campaigns may infringe upon their rights. But that concern has to be secondary to concerns raised by the public, she said.

“The first obligation is to the system, and the system can only work if the people it serves have faith in it,” she said. “Until the public knows that, when they walk into that courtroom, money has not impacted it, we can’t move forward.”

Blazick concurred.

“You can’t restore confidence in the courts by taking money from those who appear in the courts every day,” he said.

Political realities

But other candidates and their supporters say that view does not take into account the realities of seeking a political office, which unfortunately costs money.

“In our political system it is important that people be allowed to raise money, otherwise only the very wealthy would be able to run for office,” said Luzerne County District Attorney Jacqueline Musto Carroll, who made donations to six judicial candidates through her political committee, Friends of Jackie Musto Carroll.

Musto Carroll, who is running for re-election unopposed for the Democratic nomination, said she has not endorsed any particular candidate.

Her contributions were made in the form of ticket purchases to fundraising events for DeLuca, Saporito, Hughes, Mike Vough, Jim Haggerty and Tony Ross, which allowed her to do her own campaigning.

Joe Sklarosky Jr., who received $6,500 in attorney donations ($5,000 of which came from his father and law partner, Joe Sklarosky Sr.), said the public needs to look at a candidate’s entire background, not just whether they accepted attorney donations, when deciding if that person would be honest and ethical.

“We’ve learned that lesson from experience,” Sklarosky said. Former Judge Michael Conahan, who pleaded guilty last year to corruption charges, did not accept money from lawyers in his first bid for election.

“We’ve learned that making a campaign pledge not to take money from lawyers is no barometer of ethical behavior of a judge,” Sklarosky said.