It’s going to be an awkward proceeding.

Former Butler County jury commissioner Jon Galante has filed a lawsuit claiming county officials eliminated the post for which he was seeking re-election.

Galante, 29, of Butler Township claims his First Amendment rights were violated.

That claim would be difficult to substantiate since the county commissioners abolished the three jury commissioner posts in accordance with state law passed in May 2012, allowing counties to abolish their jury commissions as a money-saver. Technological advances have rendered the position obsolete. The law stood up against a challenge in the state Supreme Court.

But Galante’s claim doesn’t stop there. He also claims political retaliation, breach of contract, fraud, infliction of emotional distress, negligence and breach of good duty.

On some of these lesser claims Galante might have a case. Here’s why:

On Nov. 28, 2012, commissioners initially voted 2-1 not to eliminate the positions.

Sixth months later the commissioners voted again, this time abolishing the office.

But there was one mitigating circumstance: The second vote was two days after the primary election in which Galante was nominated for re-election as jury commissioner. Galante claims he spent time and money on his campaign assuming the office had a secure future.

Galante’s suit names as defendants the county, the elections bureau, the county board of commissioners, individual commissioners Dale Pinkerton, who voted twice to abolish, and Bill McCarrier who changed his no vote to yes, and elections director Shari Brewer.

The case will be awkward for two reasons:

• Galante later attempted to demonstrate how easy it is to taint a jury selection process. He got caught — and charged with four misdemeanor counts of interfering with the selection of jurors. He accepted accelerated rehabilitative disposition, or ARD, under which the charges could be expunged. If the case makes it to court, it may have to be determined whether the charges can be considered as evidence in a civil trial, since they go the heart of Galante’s contention that jury commissioners are responsible for preventing manipulation of the jury lists.

• If Galante wins even a partial victory, he won’t get his old job back. It no longer exists, and he wasn’t re-elected anyway.

But Galante did win the nomination, and he spent more than $10,000 the his campaign to secure the victory. Should he be reimbursed? Maybe, maybe not. As a political candidate he must have considered the possibility he might lose the nomination and have spent the campaign funds for naught anyway.

But ultimately it will be the court’s duty to decide what’s fair. If the elimination of the jury commissioners was retaliatory, as Galante contends, he still must prove rules were broken or procedures were not followed.

That won’t be an easy task. And it’s likely to be an awkward one.