YOUNGSTOWN — Only a few days after 7th District Court of Appeals Judge Mark A. Hanni filed a motion to intervene in a federal case that seeks to overturn a law requiring party affiliation for upper-court judicial candidates, the federal judge overseeing the matter rejected his request.

Judge Benita Y. Pearson denied the motion by Hanni, a Republican, ruling it was “untimely.”

Hanni filed the motion Friday, with Pearson rejecting it Monday.

Pearson wrote: “The motion was filed as this case reaches the final stages of litigation. Although Judge Hanni reviewed the court’s docket in the case, he erroneously concluded that no dispositive motion schedule had been set. In fact, the court’s Aug. 13 case management conference order, which is clearly posted on the docket, explicitly required discovery to close on Feb. 26 and dispositive motions to be filed by April 30.”

Pearson added: “Not only does his motion come six days before the parties must file their motion for summary judgment, and almost two months after discovery closed, but Judge Hanni acknowledges that he was aware of this case three months ago. Moreover, the motion acknowledges that this case has been pending before the court since November 2023 and in discovery since August 2024. Permitting intervention at this late stage would cause undue delay and would prejudice the existing parties, who would need to prepare for, consider and respond to briefings by an intervening party that has, to this point, not participated in any discovery, negotiations or proceedings.”

Hanni said at a Friday news conference that he was confident Pearson would let him intervene and if not, he would file a separate lawsuit.

Hanni said Tuesday: “I disagree with Judge Pearson’s ruling. However, I do respect the court’s decision. After careful consideration, my options are to file an amicus brief in support of the defendant’s secretary of state position, (appeal) the decision to the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals or (file) a lawsuit of my own.”

Hanni said he will notify The Vindicator of his decision as soon as he makes it.

Hanni, who is running for a different seat on the appeals court in Tuesday’s GOP primary against David “Chip” Comstock Jr., said he opposes Justice Jennifer Brunner’s lawsuit, filed Nov. 7, 2023, that seeks to overturn a 2021 law requiring party affiliation for appeals court and Ohio Supreme Court candidates.

Hanni contended that despite Brunner filing the case in 2023, it hasn’t progressed. Pearson wrote that Hanni was incorrect.

In her ruling, Pearson wrote that Hanni’s “intervention appears to seek the opportunity to ‘express his position,’ rather than preserve his rights, regarding the party designation requirements for judicial candidates on Ohio ballots. To the extent this factor weighs in favor of intervention, it is outweighed by the remaining factors. The motion is denied as untimely.”

Those factors include, Pearson wrote, the point to which the suit has progressed, the purpose for which intervention is sought, the length of time preceding the application during which Hanni knew or reasonably should have known of his interest in the case, the prejudice to the original parties and the existence of unusual circumstance for or against intervention.

Brunner filed the complaint against the secretary of state, the Office of Disciplinary Counsel and the Board of Professional Conduct contending the law that requires party affiliation on the general election ballot for candidates running for the Ohio Supreme Court or courts of appeal violates the free speech, due process and equal protection clauses of the U.S. Constitution.

Brunner filed the lawsuit after losing the 2022 chief justice race to Kennedy during the first election in which the party affiliation law took effect.