On Thursday, November 7, 2024, The Chronicle reported that a panel of judges from the Ohio Supreme Court’s Board of Professional Conduct recommended a public reprimand for Dan Petticord, along with the payment of costs and attorney fees to judge-elect Giovanna Scaletta-Bremke. This recommendation stems from violations of judicial conduct rules during Petticord’s campaign for the Lorain County Common Pleas Court.

The three-member panel concluded that Petticord made false claims about Scaletta-Bremke in a campaign mailer. These findings will now be forwarded to a five-judge commission for a final determination. Petticord, who serves as the chief assistant in the Lorain County prosecutor’s office, expressed his belief that his comments were fair and acknowledged he would accept the consequences of the panel’s decision.

Scaletta-Bremke, who recently won the election against Petticord with 64,220 votes to Petticord’s 50,786 votes, has not commented on the board’s findings. Both candidates have no prior disciplinary records.

The complaint against Petticord was initiated by Scaletta-Bremke, who presented her evidence during a Zoom hearing attended by Judge Candace Crouse of the 1st District Court of Appeals, attorney Teri Daniel from Lake County, and Franklin County attorney Lori Herf. The Board of Professional Conduct determined that Petticord violated Rule 4.3 of the Ohio Code of Judicial Conduct, which prohibits judicial candidates from knowingly publishing false information in campaign materials.

The panel’s ruling highlighted that Petticord’s campaign mailer inaccurately stated that the 9th District Court of Appeals had criticized Scaletta-Bremke for misleading the court in two cases. However, a review of the cases—State v. Yatson and State v. Newcomb—did not support Petticord’s claims. The panel noted that the appellate court’s criticisms were directed at the arguments made by counsel, not at Scaletta-Bremke personally.

Additionally, the panel pointed out that Petticord’s mailer lacked the necessary context or citations, preventing voters from making informed judgments about the claims presented. It was the only mailer issued by Petticord’s campaign during the election.

Following the mailer, Scaletta-Bremke’s attorney sent Petticord a cease-and-desist letter and sought over $3,000 in attorney fees.

The panel’s recommendation includes a public reprimand for Petticord, the costs incurred during the proceedings, and attorney fees to be determined by the commission.

 

 

Source: The Chronicle