Hits: 0
WPCNR

THE STOLEN ELECTION 2001: Larry Delgado, center, with just-relected, Mayor Joseph Delfino, on the night he thought he was elected, November 5, 2001. The Republican faithful at the Crowne Plaza Hotel were expecting District 18 to bring Mr. Delgado home comfortably ahead of Glen Hockley, when something went wrong. Mr. Delgado has been fighting through four court decisions and a quo warranto action since that night. Photo from WPCNR News Archives.
In a telephone interview Thursday with WPCNR, Larry Delgado, the “phantom councilman,” who claimed “was robbed” of a Council seat in 2001 when a voting machine jammed in District 18, costing him 103 votes which would have made him the Councilman over Mr. Hockley, spoke on where the quo warranto action brought by the Attorney General’s office is now. Mr. Delgado brought WPCNR up to date on the case that has meandered its legal way back and forth between White Plains, Brooklyn, and Albany for two years and two months without resolution.
Delgado said that Mr. Abinanti has chosen not to appeal the Appellate Court ruling. Mr. Hockley, asked on several occasions by WPCNR whether he was going to appeal said he did not know what his lawyer, Mr. Abinanti was doing on the case after the Appellate Court had unanimously thrown out their statute of limitations claim in December.
The Case Without End.
Instead, the case has been returned to Judge Francis Nicolai’s Supreme Court in
Delgado said Mr. Abinanti has made several motions, the first of which was for Judge Nicolai to appoint another judge to consider the case.

Mr. Abinanti’s second motion on behalf of Mr. Hockley was a request dismiss a report in the Attorney General Office quo warranto brief which detailed the Attorney General’s investigation and interrogation of persons involved in the 2001 election in District 18, where the machine jammed.
The third procedure is that Mr. Abinanti has begun calling witnesses involved in the case who notarized documents to depose them in preparation for a jury trial. Among those called are Mr. Delgado and his wife, and other legal representatives and witnesses. Mr. Delgado characterized this as a nuisance tactic since the testimony has all been given before.
There is also, Delgado said, a motion by the Attorney General’s Office for a “Summary Judgment” by Judge Nicolai or any judge, Mr. Nicolai appoints to resolve the matter.
Stretching a Rain Delay?
Delgado professed anxieties to WPCNR that any rulings Nicolai or the judge he appoints, should he choose to do so, could also be appealed by the Hockley camp. Delgado said he sees the potential for stretching the case out for many months to come, perhaps to the end of the present council term Delgado says the courts have determined is his.
Delgado said, “They can’t stretch this out much further, because the Appellate Court in their decision said the legislature needs to take a look at this, this has to be moved, because at the end of the expiration of the current term, the question they said is moot.”
Give Me My $60,000, Please.
Asked if he would seek full restitution of back pay, should Judge Nicolai or a subsequent judge instate Mr. Delgado to the Common Council, Delgado said he would test the full scope of the “remedy.” This would seem to indicate that Mr. Hockley would have to return the in excess of $60,000 in Councilperson salary he has received since March of 2002 when he went on the Council. By rough estimate, Hockley has been paid about $60,000 since he was sworn in to the Common Council on March 15, 2002.
Asked what his legal expenses were in mounting his legal challenge for the council seat since November 2001, Mr. Delgado acknowledged it was over $10,000 and less than $50,000, but had not totaled the figure.
Hockley Raises Funds
Mr. Hockley has, within the last week, sent out another fundraising letter to cover ostensibly his legal expenses of having Mr. Abinanti carry on the fight to save his seat.
Mr. Delgado has obtained a copy of that letter and objects to what he characterizes as Mr. Hockley’s distorting the facts of the case in the letter in which, in Mr. Delgado’s opinion, leads the audience to believe that Mr. Delgado is challenging for the seat without cause, when Delgado says, “I was robbed of a rightful seat.”












