Wednesday, April 19, 2017

"Exhibit C" (Stick goes under the bus)


Oh dear, who got thrown under that BUS?  

It's... it's...Anthony 'Stick' Romano!  Oh, the humanity!

The horrible bus accident occurred on "Exhibit C" of the Biancamano, et. al v Farina, et. al, which was filed by Attorney Steve Kleinman in Hudson County Superior Court on April 17, 2017. 

Biancamano, et. al v Farina, et. al- "EXHIBIT C"


"Exhibit C" is a  text exchange furnished by Plaintiff Biancamano for his sore-loser lawsuit (or "WAH-suit")  Biancamano, et. al v Farina, et. al; his co-Plaintiff is Committeewoman Ines Garcia-Keim.  

Both are elected Democratic Committee-persons for Ward/District 2-1-- but not for long!

Here is why they filed their WAH-suit:  Biancamano and his sore-loser running mate Ines Garcia Keim were rejected from the HCDO line; their delicately-calibrated egos couldn't stand being in ballot-exile.  Even worse, their opponents the Dallaras, are active, popular members of the Hoboken community; Sheillah, a BoE Trustee, is the mom of an autistic child and heavily involved in Special Needs Programs for kids in the Hoboken Public Schools.

Therefore, it is unlikely that Biancamano and Keim could prevail in an honest race against such opponents. In fact, the June 6 election would resemble a live burial.

So, since the "Plaintiffs" can't win an election honestly, they seized upon an administrative error- the late filing of their petitions to mount a WAH-suit.

 The Defendants of the  sore-loser WAH-suit are:
(1) the Hoboken City Clerk Jimmy Farina,
(2) the Hudson County Clerk, Barbara Netchert, and
(3) the Dallaras 
But I digress... back to the bus accident!

The "Exhibit C" text depicts Hoboken's Deputy Clerk "Jerry" correcting misinformation he'd given Biancamano on the petition filing day  (it's in the complaint).  Accordingly,  "Jerry" notifies Biancamano that in fact, he is running opposed, and he is not on the HCDO line.

But, "Jerry" is not named in the complaint, so what does the text prove?  In GA's opinion...

There appears to be no value in making this text a public document, except for exposing and embarrassing Stick Romano because it suggests that Stick is coordinating with Biancamano against the interests of his own (HCDO) slate.  The text gives the appearance that Stick is helping a friend get back on the 'line' (which can only happen if 2-1 candidates, the Dallaras, are challenged).   

Why would a friend drag Stick's name into this legal mess?  If the complaint goes to court, Stick may be called as a witness.

Moreover, who sues over 2 political committee candidates is absurd- especially since it has negligible impact on the overall imbalance imbalance between the HCDO (67 candidates) and "Other" slate (52candidates).

Sorry, but its a shitty ward-district race. Does it really merit a 63-page complaint, and a bus ride over Stick Romano?

By the way, WAH-suits don't come cheap. Who do you think is paying?

GA doesn't know.  But an interesting coincidence: the sore losers' attorney has made numerous courtroom appearances on behalf of wealthy ex-Councilwoman Beth Mason, and as an on-call legal consultant in Bajardi v Pincus discovery emails.

Another Hoboken coincidence!

23 comments:

  1. The dirty end of the stick.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hudson County taxes just went up again.

      Delete
  2. It's fun to watch them eat their own.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Seems to be trying to establish his put-outness with this text? "Relevance?" as they say in tv courtroom dramas.

    Don't get it. But if I had to catalog all the things I don't get about Hoboken politics, where would it end.....

    ReplyDelete
  4. Is the City Clerk's office open until 6:15pm everyday?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I have seen them there on council meeting nights before the meeting starts.

      Delete
  5. seems to be some narrative churn going on. starting to see the usual suspects saying "mike isn't ready" but they still want someone other than zimmmer. suggests that mike has told his peeps he's not going this year. because these trolls would support damn near anyone and hardly have a problem with defusco's "maturity". this means they will have all the more energy (and beth bucks) to fight the late registration for the dc. but how pathetic is that? by the by if you want to see an example of mike's maturity see his completely disingenuous commentary on the recent zba decision. sorry, the problem isn't maturity, it's honesty.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Mike isn't honest enough to admit his lack of maturity.


    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You would think he would know what the ZBA can and can't do after sitting on that Board.
      I can only surmise he is desperate for any issue he can use and misrepresenting the facts doesn't seem to present a ethical problem for him

      Delete
  7. The text is interesting but it doesn't address what the cure period is for missed deadline. Is there one?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. When I can get the City's opposition brief, it should be in there.

      The text is interesting, but I don't see how it advances the Plaintiffs' case which makes it gratuitous, IMO.

      Delete
  8. I Can't stand Ines or "Sandwich Head" ( as Bajardi called him) , but the fact is a 2 day late petition doesn't get a cure opportunity.
    This is a honest mistake and at this point Reform and the Hudco line should prepare to do a write- in for the wonder Dallaras. I hope the courts rule them back in , but even the most ardent Zimmer supporters are candidly saying it's very unlikely

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You appear confused, and have the legal and procedural context backward. The Dallaras are currently on the ballot. They have not sued to be ruled back in, Biancamano and Keim are seeking Court intervention to have them removed.

      Given your misunderstanding of that pretty basic fact, I seriously doubt you have the legal expertise to have a clue about the merits of the case so you're pretty unlikely to be in a position to evaluate the liklihood of a court ruling of any kind in this case or any other.

      New Jersey has an extremely strong public policy supporting ballot access and the Courts interpret the law accordingly. I don't know how the court will rule in this particular case - no-one does. It certainly is not a slam dunk for either side and I seriously doubt "even the most ardent zimmer supporters" are saying anything of the kind even in the far reaches of your little imagination.

      Delete
    2. NJ once put a Democratic candidate on the ballot for a US Senate seat who missed the deadline by months. I bet Sandwich Head and Inept lose this case.

      Delete
    3. Two wrongs don't make missing a deadline right.

      Delete
    4. When is a decision on this issue expected?

      Delete
  9. So much for your legal analysis on this one GA- Ines the creep aside, a monkey could figure 2-day late petitions were going nowhere.

    #duh

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Where did you read a "legal analysis"? Those two dirtbags couldn't stand opposition because they knew they'd LOSE.

      Well, guess what? The didn't get the line, and they aren't getting it. So, let's see WHO wins 2-1. It ain't over.

      Delete
  10. Judge tossed the city's case, corp counsel was sent to the wolves- Hoboken taxpayers forced to pay for another blunder. #zimmerblundersagain

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No- the dirtbags chose to sue... it was their CHOICE instead of trying to win honestly against the Dallaras. Why sue and spend taxpayer money-- because the dirtbags knew they coudn;t win against the Dallaras, and jealous because they didn't get the line. Well, partial victory for them because they ain't getting the line. Good luck in Siberia, Ines and Peter!

      Delete
    2. They were right to sue, the clerk screwed up

      Delete
    3. Who gets the Dem Party line now?

      Delete