Court to Take Up County Attorney's Suspension Next Month

Merrimack County Superior Court Judge Richard McNamara agreed Thursday to allow Reams’ attorney, Michael Ramsdell, to come back to court with a complaint seeking declaratory relief from the suspension.

After that, Assistant Attorney General Anne Edwards will be allowed to counter the complaint. The complaint will not stop the investigation into Reams' work at the office, only whether or not the suspension was proper.

Reams was suspended from his position on Nov. 7, after the attorney general and U.S. Attorney’s Office began an investigation into the operations and management of the Rockingham County Attorney’s Office.

All parties spent about 45 minutes Thursday not arguing the merits of the suspension, but instead whether or not it was appropriate for the attorney general to take action without any specific charges of wrongdoing filed against Reams.

Edwards argued that the hearing was not needed, since the court had already cleared the request by the attorney general to appoint another attorney temporarily.

“In fact, your honor, we don’t believe there is a need for this hearing since you are acting as an appointing body,” she said.

However, Ramsdell countered that by taking the action to allow the attorney general to suspend Reams, the court got involved in the matter and a hearing was needed to declare the validity of the suspension.

McNamara disagreed and said that the merits of the case were not before the court, only the act of suspension. Instead, the judge suggested that Ramsdell return with a challenge to the suspension.

The bulk of the discussion focused on the only case involving the suspension of a county attorney by an attorney general in the history of the state, Eames v. Rudman back in 1975.

Ramsdell said by allowing the attorney general to arbitrarily suspend any county attorney, it could be done for something silly, like the color of a tie. He challenged the attorney general’s right to suspend a county attorney who then had no ability to challenge the suspension, which was why he thought they were in court at that time. The ruling in the Rudman case, Ramsdell said, suggested that the attorney general had to have merit to suspend. In the Reams case, it wasn’t about a criminal matter, but instead about the management of the office.

But McNamara countered that even though there were no criminal charges, the attorney general had a lot of leeway, as the state’s top law enforcement officer, in its interactivity with county attorneys. He stated that the attorney general often gets involved in cases, law enforcement, and plea deals, which would seem to allow a suspension of an attorney over the management of the office.

Ramsdell stated, “The difference, on the other hand, is not how you’re handling cases … it’s you, you’re out, I’m suspending you … that’s when the court had to check (the suspension). He’s not a case; he’s a constitutional officer.”

After more discussion, McNamara suggested that Ramsdell submit a complaint of declaratory judgment to challenge the suspension, and he agreed to do that next week.  

Edwards was then asked to put together a counter claim against the complaint. She agreed, so long as this wouldn’t hinder the investigation into Reams. The judge said it wouldn’t, it would only be about the suspension itself.

The court will take up the matter again on Dec. 2.