Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: Question of the day
Next Post: Pfleger says Republicans on Audit Commission conducting “witch hunt”
Posted in:
* This just gets worse and worse for Rep. Drury…
Today, Cook County Judge Franklin U. Valderrama rejected State Representative Scott Drury’s emergency request for temporary injunctive relief, seeking to silence his opponent in the 58th District, Dr. Mark Neerhof. Attorneys for Dr. Neerhof successfully argued that Drury had not raised a “fair question” that Drury would succeed in his lawsuit.
Neerhof campaign manager, Mick Paskiewicz, issued the following statement:
“Today, the court took the right step and denied Scott Drury’s attempt to shield his record from the voters. Drury knows he’s an embattled incumbent, so he launched this desperate attempt to silence Dr. Neerhof with a frivolous lawsuit. Dr. Neerhof will continue his campaign that is gaining traction with voters, and hopefully Scott Drury will stop hiding in the court room and answer for his record.”
Drury gave less than 48 hours notice for today’s hearing, calling it an “emergency”. Dr. Neerhof was not present in court, as was caring for patients in his high-risk obstetrics practice.
*** UPDATE *** The judge’s order is here. And Dan Proft has responded…
“I appreciate the judge’s ruling on this matter. It is unfortunate that Rep. Drury, an attorney, believes that political campaigns should be litigated in court rather than decided by the voters. Instead of wasting more of his constituents’ money and the court’s time on his frivolity, Rep. Drury might consider working to stop SB 16 from cutting millions and millions of dollars in funding for schools in his district.”
posted by Rich Miller
Thursday, Oct 9, 14 @ 1:48 pm
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: Question of the day
Next Post: Pfleger says Republicans on Audit Commission conducting “witch hunt”
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
Right call made. Hope that ices any nonsense like that in the future, but won’t hold breath.
Comment by Toure's Latte Thursday, Oct 9, 14 @ 1:51 pm
You have to wonder if this legal action could be characterized as a SLAPP lawsuit?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strategic_lawsuit_against_public_participation
Comment by Anonymous Thursday, Oct 9, 14 @ 1:57 pm
Drury was a former prosecutor and gave less than 2 days notice with no citation of case law? Add that to the list that starts with “Glass house occupant”. I read that his father was representing him in this very important 1st amendment case. Is that true? Seems there would be more than ample exhibits from the HDO of mail that was more over the line. Perhaps even today’s caption contest photo will make it into the courtroom.
Oy, asking a judge to silence your opponent in a campaign? Drury is as soft as a bun.
Comment by A guy... Thursday, Oct 9, 14 @ 1:57 pm
Isn’t this when Willy comes in with a well-timed comment about Drury’s action. That be:
DOPE.
Comment by Norseman Thursday, Oct 9, 14 @ 2:05 pm
Illinois’ Citizens Participation Act applies to both individuals and organizations - you know, like a political campaign.
Furthermore, from the Illinois Citizens Participation Act: 735 ILCS 110/ -
“Acts in furtherance of the constitutional rights to petition, speech, association, and participation in government are immune from liability, regardless of intent or purpose, except when not genuinely aimed at procuring favorable government action, result, or outcome.”
Scott, please take note of that line about “regardless of intent or purpose.” You’re in the middle of a campaign, you’re not going to win this thing. Actually, you’ll be lucky if you don’t end up having to pay Neerhof’s legal bills given the CPA’s fee shifting provisions. I’m not a former federal prosecutor or anything, but my advice would be to just walk away.
Comment by Jimmy 87 Thursday, Oct 9, 14 @ 2:06 pm
I agree w/ Anon and Jimmy - I WANT to like Drury because he has shown a modicum of independence from Speaker Madigan, but then he does crazy stuff like this.
Comment by lake county democrat Thursday, Oct 9, 14 @ 2:10 pm
J87, Exactly on the dime brother.
Comment by A guy... Thursday, Oct 9, 14 @ 2:13 pm
Valderrama is a good jurist. We should be confident that it was a just result.
Comment by Percival Thursday, Oct 9, 14 @ 2:15 pm
You mean he’s not the darker complexion kid on That 70s Show? /snark, forgive me.
Comment by A guy... Thursday, Oct 9, 14 @ 2:30 pm
How did this guy get a job with the feds and a path to elected office? Is he someone’s cousin or something?
Comment by wordslinger Thursday, Oct 9, 14 @ 3:02 pm
===”he has shown a modicum of independence from Speaker Madigan, but then he does crazy stuff like this.”===
Gave me a chuckle.
Comment by walker Thursday, Oct 9, 14 @ 5:00 pm
SuperDave (SD) needs to stick to federal court
Comment by goose/gander Thursday, Oct 9, 14 @ 5:01 pm
You know what will reduce school funding by millions of dollars? The rollback of tax rates. Can’t wait to see Proft begin criticizing the Republicans for hurting local schools.
Comment by Michelle Flaherty Thursday, Oct 9, 14 @ 10:50 pm