`speechless' Brings One Word To Mind: Cute

At Least 4,200 Fans A Game Is Team's Goal 
A National Consultant Outlines The Economics Of Putting A Team In The 
Projected Arena

By JERRY LYNOTT; Times Leader Staff Writer
 Friday, December 16, 1994 &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Page: 1A 





SCRANTON -- Luzerne County Judge Chester Muroski answered the lawsuit filed
against him by his former secretary and her husband and brought the county
into the legal fray in federal court Thursday. &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 
 Muroski, in newly filed court papers, accused Mary Ann and Demetrius
Fannick of conducting investigations of his private affairs to gather
information for their lawsuit. &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; They sued Muroski in October in federal court in Scranton, alleging the
judge imposed unreasonable sick-leave limits on Mary Ann Fannick when she
threatened to expose him for allegedly using his office for personal and
financial gain. &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 
 The couple also charged Muroski with sex discrimination, saying he denied
Mary Ann Fannick's constitutional right to procreate by forcing her to choose
between her job -- one she held for nearly 20 years -- or attempts to become
pregnant through medically induced fertilization. &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 
 In his response Thursday, Muroski denied all allegations against him and
claimed Demetrius Fannick obtained information about him under the pretense
that the attorney was acting as an employee of the county Orphans Court, where
Muroski presides. &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 
 "These acts by the plaintiffs constituted an intentional and unwarranted
invasion of Muroski's privacy," the papers said. &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 
 Muroski also contends Luzerne County should be liable for any money the
Fannicks may win in court, because Mary Ann Fannick worked as a county
employee when the incidents in question took place. &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 
 As an employee, she was entitled to use accumulated sick leave when she
asked for time off. &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 
 However, Muroski said he fired her in August for not doing her job and not
producing a medical statement to show she was incapable of working during the
10 weeks she requested off with pay. The judge has produced correspondence
showing he would have welcomed her back to work before a deadline he set for
her dismissal. &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 
 On Thursday, Muroski also denied another allegation that he wrote two
anonymous letters to a local newspaper reporter about a land transaction
involving President Judge Patrick J. Toole Jr. and the county. &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 
 The letters were written to undermine Toole's application for a
federal-court vacancy and enhance Muroski's chance of receiving the
appointment, according to the Fannicks' suit. &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 
 Attorney Fannick had no comment about Muroski's responses when contacted
Thursday night at his residence. N

Suit Has Muroski Returning The Fire 
County Judge Says His Former Secretary And Her 
Spouse Invaded His Privacy To Gather Information To 
Use Against Him

Suit Has Muroski Returning The Fire County Judge Says His Former Secretary And Her Spouse Invaded His Privacy To Gather Information To Use Against Him