- 12 -
Respondent argues that Ms. Bucco’s testimony is not
credible. In support of his argument, respondent offered a copy
of Ms. Bucco’s affidavit, dated August 3, 2004, that was received
by the Court into evidence for impeachment purposes. This
affidavit indicates that Ms. Bucco mailed the piece of mail at
issue on March 29, 2004. However, Ms. Bucco’s August 3, 2004,
affidavit submitted to this Court, which was signed and
notarized, and her testimony both indicate that she mailed the
piece of mail at issue on March 30, 2004. Ms. Bucco testified
that in originally preparing her affidavit she failed to consider
that she would have given the piece of mail at issue to the
mailman the day after she prepared the petition for petitioners’
counsel’s signature. This failure apparently caused there to be
two versions of Ms. Bucco’s affidavit dated August 3, 2004.
However, given Ms. Bucco’s reasonable explanation, we do not find
this discrepancy significant enough to question Ms. Bucco’s
veracity. In all other respects, we find Ms. Bucco’s testimony
to be consistent and credible.
Petitioners’ position that their petition was timely mailed
is further supported by canceled check No. 4370, dated March 30,
2004, that named this Court as the payee. After considering Ms.
Bucco’s testimony and canceled check No. 4370, we hold that the
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011