Nancy Vernon elected Fayette County judge
Call it a hat trick.
Democrat Nancy D. Vernon last night was on her way to becoming the first woman to be elected to Fayette County's Court of Common Pleas, appearing to best Republican Ernest P. DeHaas III in a closely watched race.
With 95 of 98 precincts reporting, Vernon had 54 percent of the vote compared with DeHaas' 46 percent, according to unofficial election returns.
The win marks the third time Vernon has made history in the county. She was the first woman to practice criminal law in the county, and later became the county's first female district attorney.
"It's quite an honor for this to have occurred," Vernon said last night as she celebrated with her supporters at a Uniontown restaurant. "I'm happy for my friends, my family and my supporters who helped me along the way and helped make history tonight."
While campaigning, the two candidates stressed their lengthy careers practicing law.
Vernon, 54, began her 30-year career in civil law, but she has spent the past 13 years prosecuting criminal cases as district attorney. DeHaas gained courtroom experience as a criminal defense attorney early in his career before moving into private practice.
Vernon told voters her work as district attorney, combined with her previous private practice handling divorces, real estate law, child custody and other civil matters, had prepared her for the bench.
DeHaas gained courtroom experience as a criminal defense attorney early in his 36-year career before moving into private practice.
He is a partner in the Uniontown law firm Radcliffe & DeHaas.
A 10-year term on the bench opened because President Judge Conrad B. Capuzzi is nearing the mandatory retirement age of 70.
Results are unofficial until verified by the Fayette County Election Bureau.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.