Boca Post is tracking the Downtown Campus Redevelopment Project, one of the most significant civic initiatives currently under consideration in Boca Raton.
PALM BEACH COUNTY, FL (Boca Post) (Copyright © 2025) — Palm Beach County’s top elections official is distancing herself from the core dispute in a Boca Raton lawsuit — and telling a judge she will simply do whatever the court orders.
In a written “Answer to Complaint” filed on November 14, 2025, Supervisor of Elections Wendy Link responds to a civil case brought by Boca Raton resident and attorney Ned Kimmelman against Save Boca Inc., the City of Boca Raton and the Supervisor of Elections. The case is pending in the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit in Palm Beach County under case number 2025-CA-11366.
Link is sued “as the Palm Beach County Supervisor of Elections,” meaning only in her official capacity, not as a private individual. In the answer, her attorneys stress that she “is not alleged to have committed any wrongdoing” in the complaint and is involved only because any court order about an election or ballot would likely have to run through her office, according to the filing.
For most of Kimmelman’s factual allegations, Link’s answer says she is “without sufficient knowledge” and therefore denies them and demands “strict proof” at trial. That’s boilerplate litigation language that essentially tells the judge: we’re not agreeing to any of this; the plaintiff has to prove it with evidence under the rules of civil procedure.
The lawsuit includes a Count I for Injunctive Relief, asking the court for an emergency order known as a temporary injunction. An injunction is a court order that can stop an action from going forward or require a party to do something specific — a common tool in election fights and local government disputes because it can freeze the status quo while the case plays out.
In this case, Link’s lawyers say that the numbered allegations in Count I “are not addressed to Supervisor Link,” and that she is “not required to respond” to them. But the answer goes a step further: to the extent those allegations or demands could be read as applying to the Supervisor of Elections, she “specifically denies” them and again demands strict proof.
Where the lawsuit lays out its “prayer for relief” — the detailed list of what Kimmelman wants the judge to do — Link’s position is carefully neutral.
According to the answer, the specific remedies listed in paragraphs 1(a), 1(b) and 4 of the complaint are not directed at the Supervisor of Elections. But if those requested actions would require her office to take some step, the filing says Link “takes no position and stands ready to comply with any lawful order.”
For the remaining requests for relief, described as paragraphs 1(c), 1(d), 2 and 3 of the complaint, the answer uses the same language: Link “takes no position and stands ready to comply with any lawful order” the court may issue. In plain terms, the elections office is telling the judge it is not picking a side between Kimmelman, Save Boca and the City — it just wants clear instructions.
The response was filed by the Juno Beach law firm Jeck Harris on Link’s behalf. The document lists attorneys David K. Markarian and David R. Glickman as counsel of record.
Separately, the court has set a Case Management Conference in the same lawsuit for Wednesday, November 19, 2025, at 8:30 a.m. The order, entered by the Circuit Civil Division AI, says the hearing will be held by Zoom and specifically notes that the parties should be ready to discuss “scheduling a hearing on Plaintiff’s Emergency Motion for Temporary Injunction,” according to the case management order.
The notice warns that the conference “may not be canceled without a Court Order” and that failing to appear can lead to sanctions, including striking pleadings or dismissing the case entirely. The order also lists contact information for Kimmelman, Save Boca Inc., the City of Boca Raton and the Supervisor of Elections, along with their lawyers.
Court records also reflect a separate civil case, number 2025-CA-010277, assigned to a different division (AD) of the same circuit court, with filings in early and mid-October. The documents Boca Post reviewed show the case number and filing activity but do not include the underlying complaint or detailed rulings, so the relationship between that case and the Save Boca dispute is not clear from the public records reviewed.
Both lawsuits are part of a growing docket at the Palm Beach County courthouse that mixes local politics, nonprofit advocacy and election administration with technical legal questions about civil procedure, official capacity claims and injunctive remedies. For now, the Supervisor of Elections has made one thing clear in her own filing: her office will follow whatever the judge decides.
0 Comments