As Sen. Laughlin presses libel suit, judge imposes sanction over his missed deposition

At $240, the penalty is not large. But it is the latest example of the high level of contentiousness that has come to mark state Sen. Dan Laughlin's libel suit over a column that ran in the Erie Reader alternative newspaper nearly two years ago.

The $240 represents how much a judge has sanctioned Laughlin and his legal team for his failure to appear at a deposition.

Laughlin, a Republican who represents most of Erie County, was scheduled to be deposed in August 2023. He was to answer questions about his claims that Jim Wertz, the former chairman of the Erie County Democratic Party, defamed him in a Donald Trump-related opinion piece published in the Erie Reader in July 2022.

The $240 is meant to compensate the lawyers for the Erie Reader and Wertz for what they had to pay a stenographer to appear at the missed deposition.

The judge issued the sanctions at a hearing on Laughlin's case on Thursday in Erie County Common Pleas Court. The request for sanctions came from the legal team for the Erie Reader and Wertz, the two defendants in the case. The lawyers are arguing that the First Amendment protects the newspaper and the columnist, and that the suit is meritless.

The lawyers, according to court records, requested the sanctions after they had grown frustrated with Laughlin's failure to sit for a deposition in the time since he sued on Aug. 26, 2022. Wertz's piece ran in the Erie Reader, a monthly publication, on July 14, 2022.

The judge, Christopher St. John, a senior Common Pleas Court judge from Mercer County, rejected the arguments from one of Laughlin's lawyers as to why the senator missed the deposition.

The lawyer said Laughlin's legal team wanted to gather and receive more evidence before he faced questions from the lawyers for Wertz and the Erie Reader. The lawyer said Laughlin's legal team had let the lawyers for the Erie Reader and Wertz know that Laughlin did not plan to attend the deposition.

St. John said the concerns about evidence were not legitimate grounds for Laughlin to miss the deposition, even though Laughlin's lawyers had told the opposing lawyers in advance that Laughlin did not plan to appear at it.

"I don't see how I cannot issue sanctions," said St. John, who is presiding over the case because the Common Pleas Court judges in Erie County recused themselves. "I don't hear a solid excuse."

Two views on $240 sanction over one deposition

The lawyer who argued on behalf of Laughlin at the hearing, Shohin Vance, of Harrisburg, afterward called the $240 sanction "a routine discovery matter," referring to the evidence-gathering process known as a discovery.

Laughlin, who did not attend the hearing, said in an interview that that the $240 sanction "is just part of the process."

"We let their legal team know that we were not attending that," Laughlin said of the missed deposition. Of the request for the sanctions, he said, "That was a little bit of posturing."

Laughlin said he has been following his lawyers' advice regarding the deposition.

"I have been ready to be deposed from Day One," he said.

Wertz welcomed St. John's decision.

"We are pleased to see that the judge recognized the ongoing delays and tactics of delays from Sen. Laughlin and the additional costs it has created for our legal team to pursue his deposition," Wertz said in an interview.

Laughlin's deposition is coming up. So is Wertz's.

Laughlin's is set for April 3 and Wertz's on April 4, according to a schedule detailed at Thursday's hearing.

"We are doing it that day," Laughlin said. "We are ready to go then."

A column, an upset congressman and a lawsuit

No matter what happens at the depositions, the case appears to be a long way from ending. Both sides are still collecting evidence and reviewing records as they prepare to argue the ultimate question before the judge or a jury: Did Wertz and the Erie Reader defame Laughlin, a public figure?

And as the case moves through the court system, Laughlin and Wertz could face off at the ballot box.

Wertz, a city of Erie resident and an associate dean at PennWest Edinboro, is one of two candidates running for Democratic nomination in the April 23 primary to oppose Laughlin in November in the race for state Senate in the 49th District. Laughlin, of Millcreek Township, is seeking his third four-year term.

Wertz resigned as head of the Erie County Democratic Party to run against Laughlin. He was the chair of the local party when he wrote the column that is the target of Laughlin's suit.

The column was called "A Congressman and a State Senator Walk Into a Bar." The title referred to Laughlin and fellow Republican U.S. Rep. Mike Kelly, of Butler, whose 16th Congressional District includes Erie.

The column claimed Laughlin and Kelly were on a pardon-request list before then-President Donald Trump following the attacks on the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021.

Kelly responded to the column by blasting it as "a false narrative" at a news conference he called about a week after the column ran. He threatened to sue, but did not.

Kelly also demanded a retraction. The Erie Reader rejected the request and stood by Wertz's column.

"The First Amendment and the Pennsylvania Constitution provide robust protection for individuals and entities to gather, report, publish and comment on accurate information that is a matter of public concern or significance," a lawyer for the Erie Reader and Wertz, Paula Knudsen Burke, said in a letter to Kelly's campaign on July 25, 2022. "The Op-Ed falls squarely within the scope of those important constitutional protections."

Laughlin sued. He claimed the statements in the column were false. He is seeking damages from the Erie Reader and Wertz.

Laughlin wants defendants' lawyers disqualified

Knudsen Burke continues to represent the Erie Reader and Wertz as a Pennsylvania-based lawyer with the nonprofit Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, in Washington, D.C. The law firm of Saul Ewing, with an office in Pittsburgh, is also representing Wertz and the Erie Reader.

In another example of the contentious of the case, Laughlin and his lawyers are attacking the defendants' legal representation.

Laughlin's lawyers on Feb. 13 filed a petition that asks Judge St. John to disqualify the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press and Saul Ewing from representing the Erie Reader and Wertz.

In the unusual request, Laughlin's lawyers are claiming the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press must end its representation because Wertz is a political candidate. It is claiming Saul Ewing must end its representation because it has a conflict of interest in representing both Wertz and the Erie Reader.

Knudsen Burke called the disqualification requests meritless at the hearing on Thursday. She asked St. John to dismiss the requests outright, arguing that they represented another attempt "to silence the press."

St. John scheduled a hearing on the disqualification requests for April 15.

Laughlin: 'I clearly feel that I have been wronged'

By the time of the April 15 hearing, the depositions of Laughlin and Wertz will have occurred — if the depositions go off as scheduled. The case will proceed from there.

Laughlin said he has no plans to drop the lawsuit.

"I clearly feel that I have been wronged. That is why I didn't just let it slide," he said. "I look forward to my day in court on this, and I look forward to a resolution."

Laughlin pledged to attend his deposition in April.

"We are gearing up to go," he said. "No more delays."

Contact Ed Palattella at epalattella@timesnews.com. Follow him on X @ETNpalattella.

This article originally appeared on Erie Times-News: PA Sen. Laughlin's libel case heats up with judge ruling on sanctions