The Appellate judges rejected all of the legal arguments posed by the attorney for Picente’s campaign, such as the claim that someone must write their actual apartment number on a petition to get a candidate on the ballot, rather than only the apartment building’s actual address. In siding with the lower Supreme Court’s ruling favoring Hennessy, the Appellate judges also noted that the judge heard testimony from people who stated that they signed the petition and wanted Hennessy on the ballot, despite objections from the Picente campaign.
One issue that remains unresolved, however, is Hennessy’s complaint that Picente’s sister did not recuse herself as a potential conflict of interest as Deputy Elections Commissioner in evaluating Hennessy’s petition signatures at the time they were invalidated. Although Hennessy’s attorney attempted to bring up this point during oral arguments in Rochester today, the Appellate judges quickly stopped him because the issue of Picente’s sister had not been raised in the lower court.
That issue will have to be argued in another lawsuit, which Hennessy has said he plans to file this week alleging that his rights have been violated by this potential ethical lapse at the Board of Elections.