- Archives

Four lawyers behind a failed challenge of Ohio's presidential election results defended themselves Friday against the state attorney general's efforts to have them sanctioned for filing a "meritless claim." In legal documents filed with the Ohio Supreme Court, the lawyers said the challenge they filed on behalf of 37 voters included enough evidence of voting irregularities to back up their allegations of widespread fraud. The filing by Cliff Arnebeck, Robert Fitrakis, Susan Truitt and Peter Peckarsky was in response to Attorney General Jim Petro's Jan. 19 request to sanction them. If the court sanctions the lawyers, they could be forced to repay attorney's fees and court costs. President Bush beat Sen. John Kerry by about 118,000 votes in Ohio, which turned out to be a pivotal state in the Nov. 2 election. The lawyers' election challenge was withdrawn earlier this month, with those contesting the results saying it was clear they would be dismissed as moot with Bush set to be inaugurated. Petro's motion, filed on behalf of Secretary of State Kenneth Blackwell, said the challenge was meritless and filed for partisan political purposes. Petro's office argued the challenge presented little evidence and instead relied on theories and conjectures. In response, the lawyers argued that while they believe enough voters were disenfranchised to offset Bush's margin of victory in Ohio, it would have been unreasonable to collect depositions from each of them. Arnebeck wrote that Petro's request for sanctions was frivolous and motivated by partisan politics. Petro and Blackwell are Republicans. The high court, which could order oral arguments in the case, has no timetable for making a decision, a court spokesman said. [more]