Legal scrum forms around Rossi, BIAW, justices, depositions

• Published October 13, 2008

• Comments (0)

As expected, lawyers for Dino Rossi filed this motion in a King County court today. It asks a judge to quash a subpoena that would require him to answer questions under oath in a lawsuit prior to the Nov. 4 election.

The suit alleges campaign-finance wrongdoing by a builder group. Activist lawyer Knoll Lowney contends Rossi’s involvement in calling board members of the Master Builders of King & Snohomish Counties can’t be clarified without a statement under oath, and he contends voters should know the facts before the election.

But Rossi’s lawyer Michael Patterson said in a motion filed with the court that two ex-Supreme Court justices who filed suit lack jurisdiction in the case. He said the issues raised in the suit are already raised in a court action filed by the Attorney General’s Office last month against the Building Industry Association of Washington.

He lastly contended it would be a burden to force Rossi into questioning just prior to the election.

As a back-up plan, if the court fails to quash the subpoena, Rossi wants a protective order to keep him from having to testify until after the election.

Rossi’s lawyer also said in his brief that Lowney’s action is “a politically-motivated effort to guarantee Mr. Rossi’s unavailability to his campaign, to improperly employ the court system for political gain, and to unfairly sway voter sentiment in favor of Governor Gregoire.’’

The effort to interview Rossi under oath clearly comes in the week mail-in ballots become available to voters, and Lowney originally set Wednesday as the date for the deposition — the same day as the final gubernatorial debate and the same date ballots become available for mail-in voters.

Lowney said he plans to file a reply Wednesday and that a new date for the proposed deposition is Monday, Oct. 20.

Activist group Fuse issued a news release quoting one of the retired Supreme Court justices, Faith Ireland, as saying: “The purpose of campaign disclosure laws is to let people know the facts before they cast their vote. It is improper for Mr. Rossi to try to suppress the truth by dodging his subpoena; he should welcome an opportunity to answer these serious charges.”

The state Republican Party issued this press release attacking Lowney as a tool of Gov. Chris Gregoire’s campaign, saying the “legal eagle is more like a cuckoo bird.’’ Lowney called it a “flat-out lie’’ and said he is not being paid by anyone yet in the case, which he is taking on contingency.

State GOP chairman Luke Esser also accused Lowney of being paid to pursue legal action in 2006 against Republican U.S. Senate candidate Mike McGavick over his golden parachute and whether payments to McGavick by Safeco were a campaign contributions.

But Lowney said he also worked the McGavick case on a contingency basis and “lost my shirt” on it, because he lost in court and recovered no fees. On the Rossi-BIAW cases, he said he is working like any trial lawyer on contingency and he won’t receive fees unless he wins in court — where he can ask for reimbursement of his fees.

The GOP said Lowney also has grabbed headlines for a lawsuit to remove the Qwest logo from Seattle’s similarly named professional football field, to keep Tim Eyman’s I-960 tax-limitation measure off the ballot in 2007, and that Lowney’s law partner Richard Smith ran for Supreme Court at the last minute in 2006 in a bid to confuse voters with name candidates named Smith and Johnson.