There’s an interesting below-the-radar race in Manhattan for Civil Court judge in Manhattan taking place.
Attorney Tony Cannataro has locked up the support of the Democratic establishment — Rep. Nadler, Council Speaker Quinn, Borough President Stringer and a bunch of clubs (Chelsea Reform Democratic Club, McManus Midtown Democratic Club, Barack Obama Democratic Club).
He’s going up against Sabrina Krauss, a housing judge who has Michael Oliva as her consultant. Oliva has a record of winning judicial races with female candidates. (Jerry Skurnik, another notable consultant, is also helping out.)
Financially, Cannatro has an advantage, with $78,176.52 compared to Kraus’ $68,998.29.
Beating a better-funded, better-supported judicial candidate “isn’t entirely impossible, just improbable,” wrote Frank Lombardi, who spotted this race back in June.
The biggest factor that may determine the race — that of the New York Times endorsement — is still up for grabs.
The candidates are going in for their endorsement interview on August 18, I’m told. As a rule of them, the impact of the Times endorsement is in direct proportion to how low-profile and indistinguishable the candidates remain.
Follow Azi Paybarah via RSS.
[...] read “Manhattan’s Contested Judicial Race: Cannataro” vs. Kraus” by Azi Paybarah link here. Azi Paybarah, Jerry Skurnick, Michael Oliva, [...]
Tony Cannataro is the most qualified candidate and will make an outstanding judge. I’ve been to one of his fundraisers and he is raising funds by reaching out to neighborhoods and family and friends… unlike Sabrina Kraus, whose funds are coming from Firms representing landlords. Tony has the support and has the funding. He should win this race.
interesting division you note (“neighborhood and family and friends” versus “Firms representing landlords.”
money + judicial candidates usually = good stories.
any particularly good examples of people donating for something other than altruistic reasons?
also…
any predictions on the turnout of the race? who wins, and by how much?
sounds like politicians for cannataro against landlords for kraus - wonder if Quinn , Stringer, Nadler ever collected money from the landlords………hey, let’s check their campaign filings, too…….maybe that’s what’s really going on here ……
I’d be interested in Dan’s answer to this one myself.
I always put odds on an Oliva-backed candidate.
Actually
Actually, if you look at the guy’s report $50,000 comes from himself, and the other 37 in fact includes a few of those lawyers and landlords lol.
Fair is fair.
The fund raising numbers are merely a snap shot of the race on a particular day. Everyone knows that Sabrina Kraus is backed by the landlords of New York City and is expected to outspend Tony Cannataro two to one. Look at the corporate contributors on her fund raising report and you will see the underbelly of NY real estate. Could it be because her entire private practice career was spent kicking people out of rent control apartments? How she was appointed to be a housing court judge is one of those questions that all New Yorkers should be suspicious of.
There is a reason that all of NY’s political establishment has endorsed Tony Cannataro. Probably more to do with her reputation then his.
I’m not sure I want judges taking the bench that are supported by “all of New York’s political establishment.” That sounds to me like more of a reason for suspicion than anything else I can think of.
…and if your point is that the person who has raised $10,000 less is somehow the candidate with more money and power than that’s a stretch to say the least.
Judge Kraus was appointed to Housing Court by Johnathan Lippman, who just happens to be the Chief Judge of the State of New York. Are you questioning his credentials as well?
What about Jerry Nadler’s and Scott Stringer’s opinion do you not trust? Or is that just a generalized I don’t trust anyone in government…
I don’t trust a person who spent years going after rent controlled tenants. That’s an issue that matters to me.
This is juvenile. Judge Kraus has rendered numerous decisions which have benefitted tenants greatly. Judges cannot play the insider hack game of working clubs and playing games. They are prohibited from doing so by law.
We don’t need another clubhouse hack court attorney on the bench. Politicians should not act as an influence on the judiciary, and probably shouldn’t have much to do with choosing judges whose job it is to follow the law and be impartial.
The courts need some more adult supervision, and not exist as a mill for those who choose to schmooze their way to higher employment.
Save the spin.
So this is why Sabrina Kraus applied and failed to get any of the same endorsements? Don’t pretend that she is above it all. Sabrina has spent the last year lording her money and fund raising prowess all over town. Her open threats to cut off the money tap to anyone who didn’t support her back fired.
I knew you did not have a substantive answer for this.
Politics and courts should not mix, period. This is exactly why we need reform.Show me a politician supporting Cannataro that has not accepted copious amounts of landlord and developer money and I’ll sell you a shiny new bridge in Brooklyn.
Scott Stringer is a politician. Guess which candidate his mother supports? Not Tony. Moms know best!
this is entirely untrue. i’m not sure who your source is on this, or why you would write it, but i’m told from a direct source that this is inaccurate.
never thought i’d have to say this about a judicial race, but can
we please leave everyone’s mother alone?
thanks
Tony Cannataro has the support of many in the Democratic political community precisely because he is measured, calm, and respectful of the rule of law–a wise and well-informed jurist who has no evident biases, is beholden to no one, and reflects the values and priorities of people within the district. This is a matter of competence and judicial temperament, not connections or fundraising capability. My understanding is that many people–I among them– are going to go out and work hard for him precisely because of his competence, qualifications and personal excellence–no more or less than that.
So he’s endorsed by the whole political establishment and beholden to nobody. Interesting perspective.
sure sounds like a campaign staffer (or some guy from the Lex Club) knocking out this “comment” – it’s like generic campaign lit language – try harder
I’m not part of the Cannataro campaign staff, but rather a longtime observer and volunteer on Democratic elections and issues. So I’m not sure who should “try harder.” However, I do live in the district and am still idealistic enough to think that the candidate with the strongest qualifications and maximum freedom from baggage or bias can still win this judicial election.
“I’m not part of the Cannataro campaign staff, but rather a longtime observer and volunteer on Democratic elections and issues. ”
Riiiigghtt.
Anybody who has spent five minutes in Judge Kraus’ courtroom knows that she has spent the past 5 years using her expertise in landlord-tenant law to protect the tenants of nyc. The fact that the firms that she rules against on a daily basis are contributing to her campaign only shows their respect for her as a jurist. Tony Cannataro has not spent 5 minutes in civil court, and is nothing more than the candidate that the party machine is trying to put into office. Go listen to the 1000s of tenants that judge kraus is helping on a daily basis, you will quickly learn, as they often tell her, she was born to be sitting in that seat.
If Sabrina Kraus is so competent, why was she not reported out of the screening panel this year for possible reappointment to the housing court? And why is she appealing the decision?
You are misinformed. There is no appeal, the hearing is Monday. But at least we know that you’re not here to talk about who’s qualified. Why don’t you reveal your true identity instead of taking anonymous potshots.
My guess is “Guest” is the type who’d fix a panel anyway. Because that stuff NEVER happens, ever.
Hello Guest. You’re desperately misinformed, or sadly just faking it. She was reported out unanimously on Monday.
Truth always rises above the political fog. I guess insider political hits don’t always win over honesty and hard work. For now on try harder to see through the haze. Conceptual clarity is truly fundamental. Go Sabrina!
I’ve campaigned with Sabrina extensively in all kinds of housing. She hears EVERY NYCHA case in the district (3rd). Not ONCE, on the campaign trail, has a tenant had a problem with her rulings. She’s a great judge, and she deserves to represent the people in the district she is ALREADY representing as a sitting judge. Roll tide!