ShareThis Page
Silvis, Monzo win face-off for Westmoreland judge seat |
General News

Silvis, Monzo win face-off for Westmoreland judge seat

| Tuesday, May 16, 2017 11:03 p.m
Shane Dunlap | Tribune-Review
Jim Silvis, candidate for Westmoreland County Court of Common Pleas, arrives at the Rialto in Greensburg on Tuesday, May 16, 2017, to speak with supporters and campaign volunteers, including Larisa Debich (right) and her family who volunteered for Silvis' campaign.
Shane Dunlap | Tribune-Review
Lisa Monzo, candidate for Westmoreland County Court of Common Pleas, greets supporter David Shelapinsky as guests arrive at her election night party in Greensburg on Tuesday, May 16, 2017.
Lisa Monzo is a candidate for a seat on the Westmoreland County Court of Common Pleas.
Jim Silvis is a candidate for the Westmoreland County Court of Common Pleas.
Anthony Bompiani is a candidate for a seat on the Westmoreland County Court of Common Pleas.

Lawyer Jim Silvis and attorney Lisa Monzo will continue their campaigns to become a Westmoreland County Common Pleas Court judge in November.

Silvis, 41, of Unity finished first among the three candidates in the Republican primary. According to unofficial results from the county election bureau, Silvis edged out Youngwood District Justice Anthony Bompiani by just 554 votes.

With all 305 precincts reporting, Silvis received 41 percent of the vote; Bompiani received 38 percent; and Monzo had 22 percent in the Republican primary.

Monzo, the lone registered Democrat in the field, was the top vote-getter in that party’s primary. She received 42 percent; Bompiani, 31 percent; and Silvis, 26 percent.

Westmoreland County judges earn $178,868 a year.

Monzo, who is making her first bid for public office, said she was looking forward to the two-candidate race in November against Silvis.

“I’m very grateful to the people who voted for me and the people who helped me. I will approach the race the same way I approached the primary. My message is that I am concerned about families. That is what my focus has been and what it will be,” Monzo said.

Silvis’ victory in the Republican primary was in doubt until the final results were tallied as he held just a slim lead over Bompiani most of the night.

“It was a long wait and I was on pins and needles,” Silvis said. “We didn’t know who won until those last precincts were counted.”

Bompiani conceded the race and said he would not seek a recount.

“Those two ran great races. It just wasn’t in the cards for me tonight,” Bompiani said.

Monzo and Silvis will seek to fill a vacancy on the Common Pleas Court left by the death last year of longtime Judge Debra Pezze.

According to campaign finance reports filed this month in Harrisburg, the three-way primary race has become one of the costliest in the state. The candidates combined have spend more than $268,000 during their campaigns since Jan. 1.

Silvis serves as an assistant solicitor for Westmoreland County and is a partner in his private law practice, O’Connell and Silvis in Greensburg. It’s his second attempt to win a 10-year judge seat; he lost in the 2015 primaries.

Monzo, 50, of Hempfield is making her first run for public office. She works in a Greensburg law firm with her husband and father.

She previously served as a law clerk for two county judges and has taught as an adjunct law professor at Seton Hill University.

Bompiani, 38, of Hempfield is a former assistant public defender and private attorney. He was elected to serve a six-year term as district judge in Youngwood in 2015.

Rich Cholodofsky is a Tribune-Review staff writer. Reach him at 724-830-6293 or

Categories: General News
TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using 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.