Press Release For Immediate Release

Contact Colleen M. OToole 216-509-5433

OToole to Challenge Finding of Campaign Violation

Colleen OToole, a former Judge on the Eleventh District Court of Appeals who is seeking to return to that court, will challenge the findings of a three member panel that held her website and a name tag used in her campaign violated the rules that apply to judicial candidates, ruling on a grievance filed at the behest of her opponent, Judge Mary Jane Trapp. The panel consisting of a Knox County judge, a Columbus based lawyer and a Cleveland area union representative issued its opinion on October 1, 2012. It found that the candidates website, in which she identifies herself as the president of a translation service, but also refers to her as Judge OToole and describes her service on the bench, and a plastic name tag reading Colleen Mary OToole Judge 11th District Court of Appeals have the capacity to mislead voters into thinking OToole is the incumbent. The panel recommended dismissing a third charge, involving a photo of OToole in judicial robes, finding it appeared on a website that she did not run. The hearing panel is the third step in a complex, five step process under which complaints against judicial candidates are resolved. Its decision is a recommendation and not binding. From here, the case goes to a panel of five judges, which has yet to be appointed by the Ohio Supreme Court. The charges against OToole were filed by James Davis, a non-practicing attorney from Chagrin Falls. In a hearing held in Columbus on September 18, 2012, Davis admitted that the grievance was drafted by the Trapp campaign, and that he agreed to file it in his name. OToole is challenging the constitutionality of the rules implicated by the grievance, which she argues violate the First Amendment protection of her right to free speech. OToole said she would alter the website, and stop using the name tag at issue for now, out of respect for disciplinary process, until a final ruling is made in her case. In July 2012, a panel of thirteen judges held that William ONeill, also a former member of the Court of Appeals and a candidate for the Ohio Supreme Court, did not violate the Rules of Judicial Conduct by referring to himself as Judge in a campaign flyer. That panel found that the First Amendment afforded ONeill the right to use the term. The United States Supreme Court has held that judicial candidates enjoy the same free speech rights as others seeking elected office, and rules similar to those under which OToole is charged have been invalidated as unconstitutional in other states. 30 -