WPCNR WHITE PLAINS LAW JOURNAL. By Peter Katz. January 16, 2010: WPCNR learned at the Federal Courthouse in White Plains this week that it will likely be another couple of weeks before a federal judge (Kathy Seibel) decides whether to allow a lawsuit growing out of Councilman Glen Hockley's campaign for mayor to proceed to trial.

Former Councilman Glen Hockley, October, 2009. WPCNR News Archive

 The lawsuit originally was filed without an attorney by Hockley, White Plains resident Martin B. London, and the group Citizens for Glen Hockley. Former Mayor Delfino's Executive Officer, the late Paul Wood, had planned to testify for Citizens for Glen Hockley, according to court documents.

The suit names Westchester Board of Elections Commissioners Reginald LaFayette and Carolee Sunderland, two of the Board's employees, Jeannie L. Palazola and Douglas Colety, and White Plains Councilman Dennis Power.

The Judge gave the plaintiffs (Mr. Hockley and Mr. London) an opportunity to amend their original complaint to focus more on issues of interest to the federal court. The amended complaint alleges conspiracy with malicious intent to keep Hockley off the ballot for mayor, to suppress the vote during election day and to try to manipulate the results after election day. It alleges interference with constitutional rights and voting rights.

The lawsuit alleges that New York State election law was used to violate Hockley's right under the first and fourteenth amendments of the constitution to run as a candidate for election, his right to associate for the advancement of his political beliefs, and his right of political expression as a candidate for Mayor of White Plains.

The lawsuit alleges that the right of voters in White Plains such as plantiff Martin B. London were violated because they lost their right to cast their votes effectively, their right to associate for the advancement of their political beliefs, and their right to political expression.

As you may recall, Hockley's name was removed from the ballot, and he conducted a write-in campaign. Among other things, the lawsuit alleges that county election officials failed to stock machines with pencils for write-ins, as required by law.....and that poll workers were not properly trained in doing write-in votes and did not help voters with write-ins.

It alleges vote tampering, voting machine tampering, and irregularities and violations of election laws when the votes were counted. There were 45 pages of exhibits, designed to support the allegations.

The lawsuit asks for a jury trial; a finding that the Plantiff's constitutional rights were violated; a new election; undefined compensatory and punitive damages; and, legal fees and costs.