News
Government
Feb. 27, 2002
Panel Stays Judge's Decision to Undo Compton Mayoral Election
LOS ANGELES - Eric Perrodin will be mayor of Compton again - at least for now. Less than three weeks after a Superior Court judge's ruling ousted Perrodin from the post he won in the June 5 election and effectively handed it over to runner-up Omar Bradley, an appellate court has stayed the unprecedented decision.
Less than three weeks after a Superior Court judge's ruling ousted Perrodin from the post he won in the June 5 election and effectively handed it over to runner-up Omar Bradley, an appellate court has stayed the unprecedented decision.
The 2nd District Court of Appeal unanimously decided Tuesday that there were "significant and substantial issues" in the case to hear on appeal.
In the meantime, a stay "will serve to prevent irreparable harm to the voters of the City of Compton," the court wrote.
The court ordered Perrodin, a part-time Los Angeles deputy district attorney, reinstated as mayor as of 4 p.m. Thursday.
Perrodin's attorney, Fred Woocher of Strumwasser & Woocher in Santa Monica, said he had been hoping for just such a result.
"We thought it was the right thing to do in the circumstances, and we're thrilled that the court agreed," Woocher said.
Election law experts had widely agreed that the case was susceptible to a stay or reversal on appeal because of its reliance on a highly debated social science theory known as "primacy effect." The theory holds that people choose what is first in a list or, in an election setting, the first name on a ballot.
Woocher believes the 2nd District's decision reflects the court's concern with the unprecedented - and, Woocher believes, wrong - way in which the Superior Court relied on testimony about the primacy effect given by an Ohio State University professor.
In her ruling, Superior Court Judge Judith Chirlin relied heavily on the testimony of professor Jon Krosnik. Krosnik extrapolated from studies he had done in Franklin County, Ohio, to find that, if Bradley had been listed first on the ballot, he would have received at least 306 more votes. Chirlin found that to be sufficient grounds to overturn the election, which Perrodin won by a 281-vote margin.
Chirlin made the dramatic ruling Feb. 8 after a trial that lasted 36 days and included 85 witnesses and hundreds of exhibits.
"[The judges] were clearly troubled by the trial court's reliance on the primacy effect from elections in Ohio to literally reverse the outcome of an election held here in Compton," Woocher said. "As we argued, that was an unprecedented remedy and unprecedented decision, and they highlighted that in their order."
In its decision, the appellate court said that the issues to be examined during an appeal would include whether the Compton city clerk complied with statutory procedures to ensure randomization of candidates names on the ballots, whether a failure to randomize candidates names is grounds for an election contest, and whether the trial court "properly applied" the primacy effect theory when it subtracted votes from Perrodin and essentially added them to Bradley's total.
Bradley's attorney, Bradley W. Hertz, who is of-counsel to Reed & Davidson in Los Angeles, declined comment on the appellate court's findings.
However, in his oral argument before the court Monday, Hertz defended the notion of a primacy effect in the election.
"This is not junk science. This is not fuzzy math," he said.
Hertz also pointed to a tradition of using social science in court decisions. He said that in the landmark U.S. Supreme Court case Brown v. Board of Education, the court relied on social science studies of the negative impact of segregation on students.
Hertz disputed the notion that, because Chirlin's decision was unusual, it also was wrong.
"I think the judge courageously and with proper authority chose the remedy that cured the wrong," he told the appeals court. "As unprecedented as it may have been, I think it was the precise, perfect remedy."
Election law specialist and Loyola Law School professor Richard L. Hasen said he was not surprised by the court's ruling, having followed the case and having attended oral arguments Monday.
"The judges were, I think, swayed not only by the irreparable harm that would be done by reversing [the election results based] on the testimony of one social scientist, but were also swayed by a quick look at the underlying merits," he said.
Hasen, who consulted for the city of Compton during the trial phase, said the appellate court's decision is crucial because it determines who will be in office as the appeal continues over the coming months.
"This is perhaps the most important ruling in the whole appellate process," he said.
Because the ruling does not go into effect until Thursday, Bradley has until then to appeal to the state Supreme Court.
However, Woocher doubts that the Supreme Court would overturn the appeals court decision, thereby continuing the pingpong game being played with the mayor's office.
"I think the mayorship will remain in Perrodin's hands," he said.
#337627
Erin Carroll
Daily Journal Staff Writer
For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:
Email
Jeremy_Ellis@dailyjournal.com
for prices.
Direct dial: 213-229-5424
Send a letter to the editor:
Email: letters@dailyjournal.com