Greensburg attorney vies for open seat on common pleas panel
Greensburg lawyer Bill McCabe has made his career in the courtroom for more than three decades.
Now, McCabe wants to ensure he spends his workdays under the courthouse dome serving as a Common Pleas judge.
McCabe, 57, of North Huntingdon announced Tuesday he is a candidate for one open seat on the county bench to replace Judge John Driscoll, who was forced into retirement at the end of last year.
“In my career the most satisfying experiences as a lawyer occurred when I represented a client in the courtroom. Serving as a judge would allow me to work in the environment I like the most,” McCabe said.
A registered Democrat, McCabe will appear on both the Democratic and Republican primary ballots on May 21.
The judicial vacancy was created by the mandatory retirement of Driscoll, who has since filed a lawsuit seeking to be reinstated. That case is pending in Commonwealth Court.
McCabe was hired by Driscoll in 1982 to serve as an assistant district attorney. After working as a county prosecutor for four years, McCabe left to join his current Greensburg law firm, DeBernardo, Antoniono, McCabe, Davis and DeDiana.
McCabe handles criminal and civil cases.
“I've reached a point in my profession where I think I have now acquired the experience where I can be the most effective as a judge,” McCabe said. “I've been campaigning in this county for the last 32 years without knowing it.”
Rich Cholodofsky is a staff writer for Trib Total Media. He can be reached at 724-830-6293 .
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.