WPCNR
Judge Nicolai said the Board of Elections did nothing wrong in denying Mr. Hockley a place on the ballot due to Mr. Hockley’s failure to file a Certificate of Acceptance, but that it was clear that Hockley wanted to run for the office.
Nicolai taking an hour recess to review a1987 Appellate Division decision of 1987 that had ruled against an independent candidate in similar circumstances, returned to the court room at 12:10 P.M. and then dismissed County Attorney Matthew Gallagher’s citing of the 1987 Appellate court case, saying that if the courts really felt a Certificate of Acceptance was necessary they would have said so.
Glen Hockley, in the hall after the decision, said, “the people have won this day. I will never forget it.”
Nicolai discounted the question of conspiracy against Hockley by the Board of Elections, as Hockley had claimed, saying that the notice the Board of Elections claimed they sent to Mr. Hockley, which Mr. Hockley said he never received, did not specifically deal with a candidate’s need to accept the nomination of a party.
Rather, Nicolai said, the intent of the notice(a postcard) copy advises the candidate of the last day to declaim (refuse) a nomination. Nicolai sharply rebuked Hockley’s attorney, Nelson Canter for Mr. Canter’s continuing refusal to see that distinction.
Nicolai said in reviewing the Irdine vs. Sachs case of 1987, cited by the County Attorney Mr. Gallagher as speaking to the present Hockley case, said “that case was decided on strict construction of the law…if the legislature felt it (a Certificate of Acceptance) was as important, it would have said so.”
Nicolai said, in directing Hockley’s name be placed on the ballot, that running for office was “a very important right that must not be denied” unless there were very extenuating circumstances.
Commissioner of the Board of Elections, Reginald LaFayette told reporters he would be consulting with Mr. Gallagher whether or not to appeal the Judge’s decision. LaFayette said that there were other candidates who had been denied places on ballots due to failures to supply Certificates of Acceptance in a timely manner, noting a case in Lewisboro where that also was the B.O.E.’s ruling.
Hockley two weeks ago had told WPCNR that when petitions were filed, the Board of Elections had never told his representatives, including his attorney, Nelson Canter, that a Certificate of Acceptance needed to be filed.
When told of Mr. LaFayette’s contention he had told Mrs. Hockley personally that her husband had to file a Certificate of Accepance, Hockley told WPCNR this afternoon, “That’s a bald-faced lie. My attorney was standing right beside her,” as far as giving Mrs. Hockley a paper clip and fill-out advice, Hockley said, “that’s what he’s supposed to do.”
