Court rules DeBartola can resubmit complaint against city, planning commission

Dave Sutor, The Tribune-Democrat, Johnstown, Pa.
·2 min read

EBENSBURG, Pa. – A recent court ruling will enable a civil case dealing with City of Johnstown and Johnstown Planning Commission courtesy-of-the-floor policies to continue in the Cambria County Court of Common Pleas.

City resident John DeBartola brought the action after feeling he was inappropriately cut short when speaking during a planning commission meeting in February 2023.

Both parties filed multiple motions.

The defendants sought to have the case dismissed.

Their lawyers argued that the original complaint was invalid because DeBartola hand-delivered it to the assistant city manager instead of having the county sheriff’s office perform the task.

But Senior Judge Patrick Kiniry determined the defendants “have not shown that DeBartola intended to stall the judicial machinery or how the defective service has prejudiced them.” It was also noted that the defendants engaged in negotiations with DeBartola in an attempt to avoid litigation after the complaint was brought.

Kiniry therefore determined dismissal was not warranted and DeBartola can resubmit his complaint because “these defects may be cured by amendment.”

DeBartola has 30 days from the ruling to refile his complaint.

“This is how I look at it – it’s a victory for me because they threw everything they had at me and they lost,” DeBartola said.

“The complaint can still be filed and pursued.”

DeBartola originally asked for an apology, filing fees, approval to redo his speech and changes to the courtesy-of-the-floor policies.

“So for an apology and to redo a speech, God knows how much they’ve spent in legal fees from the taxpayers, which they’re ultimately going to blame me for, but it’s their own stupid fault,” DeBartola said.

“Why would they do this? Why waste all this money when they’ve already admitted they’re wrong? They know they’re wrong.”

City Manager Ethan Imhoff declined an interview request since the subject was active litigation, which is common practice for the city.