Pringle Partisans Sue Umberg Over His Title on Ballot : Politics: Assemblyman claims ‘assistant U.S. attorney’ designation is ‘misleading’ because his opponent no longer holds office. The challenger calls the suit a phony issue.

SACRAMENTO — In the first volley of what promises to be a nasty legislative campaign, backers of Assemblyman Curt Pringle (R-Garden Grove) filed suit Wednesday against Democratic opponent Thomas Umberg for using the “misleading” title of “assistant U.S. attorney” on the November ballot.

The lawsuit asks a Sacramento Superior Court judge to force Umberg to change the listing to “attorney-at-law,” a designation Pringle forces hope will be less impressive to voters in the central Orange County district.

Umberg, a former federal prosecutor now employed as a private attorney in a Newport Beach law firm, immediately branded the lawsuit a “frivolous” publicity stunt and asked for an accelerated hearing on the matter next week. A spokeswoman for the secretary of state’s office said Umberg’s designation was approved by its election officials and is considered proper.

But Pringle and James R. Parrinello, the San Francisco attorney who filed the suit, claimed that Umberg’s use of the title represents a crucial ethical and strategic point in the campaign, which is expected to be a hard-hitting affair over what was once the traditional Democratic seat in conservative Orange County.

“To be truthful with the voters, he should list his present occupation,” said Pringle, who himself was elected to the Assembly in 1988 under a cloud of controversy over the use of uniformed security guards at polling places.

“There is an ambiguity in the law, and when there is, it is challengeable,” Pringle said about the suit. “I know the people who filed the suit feel it is a misleading ballot title, and it certainly is a misleading ballot title.”

There is also a tactical reason for the court challenge: The suit claims that Umberg’s use of the title may influence “tens of thousands of voters” in the race to represent the 72nd Assembly District, which contains Stanton and portions of Garden Grove, Westminster, Santa Ana and Anaheim.

“It’s obvious why the title is being sought,” Parrinello said. “I can’t read inside of somebody’s mind, but I think if you ask professional pollsters what sounds better, assistant U.S. attorney or attorney-at-law, you can predict what the outcome is going to be. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure that out.”

Parrinello said the ballot designation could be especially important come November, when more substantive issues in the Assembly race could become lost in the general political cacophony surrounding more high-profile contests for governor and ballot initiatives.

“It’s going to be a very complicated ballot, and it’s going to be hard for them (voters) to focus, and they will more likely be influenced by something like this,” Parrinello said.

Pringle and fellow Republicans know well how much small tactical decisions can affect the race. Pringle won the 1988 race by a mere 867 votes.

The squeaker of a victory, however, was immediately marred by accusations that the Republicans had used dirty tricks to scare away potential Democratic voters by posting guards at several heavily Latino precincts in Santa Ana.

County Republican Party officials agreed to a $400,000 settlement of a lawsuit filed against them because of the controversy, which dogged the rookie lawmaker during his first two-year term. Pringle was a defendant in the suit.

Convinced they were cheated out of the seat, Assembly Democrats have designated Pringle’s defeat as a top priority in the November legislative races.

Umberg, Pringle’s challenger, quit his job as assistant U.S. attorney on Jan. 31, the day before he filed his declaration of candidacy and shortly before taking a job as a private attorney with the Newport Beach firm of Palmieri, Tyler, Wiener, Wilhelm & Waldron.

Although he has not held the position for more than six months, the secretary of state’s office has ruled that Umberg could use his old job title on the ballot.

“Our policy is that if you resign the position to seek public office, then you can use that position” on the ballot, spokeswoman Melissa Warren said.

But Pringle objected, asking his contender to withdraw the ballot designation voluntarily by Aug. 15. When Umberg refused, Pringle cooperated with the state Republican Party in choosing two supporters and members of the Orange County Republican Central Committee to file Wednesday’s suit.

“If Umberg’s ballot designation is not changed, it will cause irreparable harm to petitioners and to the voters of the 72nd Assembly District by creating public confusion and misinformation concerning one of the two major party candidates,” the suit said.

Parrinello said that at a hearing next week he will ask a Sacramento judge to follow suit with a ruling made earlier this year that altered the designation for state insurance commissioner hopeful Walter Zelman and state treasurer candidate Angela Buchanan.

Superior Court Judge James T. Ford ruled that Zelman, who quit his post as director of California Common Cause to run in the Democratic primary, could not call himself “director, Common Cause” on the ballot; instead, he ran as “director, consumer’s organization.”

Likewise, Buchanan, of Orange County, was barred from referring to herself as “retired U.S. Treasurer,” opting instead for “chief financial officer.” Both lost.

Umberg said Wednesday that Pringle was trying to “grandstand” by seizing on the ballot designation, which he said has been challenged through the secretary of state without success.

“He’s filed a frivolous, frivolous lawsuit, and he’s seeking headlines,” Umberg said. “The issue’s been taken up with the secretary of state twice before, and twice before the secretary of state has found my ballot designation to be accurate. I expect the court to do likewise.”