#

It may not have been entirely true when the New Hampshire Democratic Party (NHDP) Chair Ray Buckley told voters former Bedford Rep. Dan Hynes was a convicted felon who had been disbarred, but the jury at last month’s trial in Hillsborough Superior Court-North found it wasn’t totally untrue, either. 

Hynes, a Republican who quit his House seat in February over questions about his residency, did not respond to a request for comment about his now-failed defamation lawsuit against the NHDP and Buckley. 

The December trial ended with the jury deciding that a 2018 election mailer informing voters about Hynes’ theft conviction was basically true. That’s despite the fact Hynes later had the conviction annulled, which the mailer did not make clear. 

The jury also found the mailer’s description of Hynes getting disbarred as a lawyer because of the conviction was false on the facts, but true in its essence. Hynes was never disbarred, but he did have his law license suspended for one year as a result of the 2008 conviction. 

Buckley and the NHDP argued Hynes was essentially liable-proof, meaning either his reputation was already so diminished that it could not be further damaged, or that the truth about Hynes is just as damaging as the falsehood.

Hynes lost his 2018 race for state Senate after the NHDP sent more than 6,000 mailers featuring a Hynes photo doctored to look like a police mug shot and alerting voters of his criminal conviction for theft by extortion.

“THE WRONG KIND OF CONVICTIONS. [Hynes] targeted woman-owned businesses for extortion. [He] was charged by Republican Attorney General Kelly Ayotte, convicted by the state of New Hampshire for ‘theft by extortion’ and disbarred,” the mailer stated.

According to court records, Hynes sent a “Cease and Desist/Demand Letter” to Claudia Lambert, Claudia’s Signature Salon owner in Concord, in 2009. Hynes claimed that because Lambert’s salon charged women more money for haircuts than men or children, she was engaging in gender discrimination. 

Hynes’ letter demanded that she stop charging women more money and that she pay him $1,000. Lambert’s husband contacted the New Hampshire Attorney General’s Office, and during a sting operation, an investigator witnessed Hynes taking $500 to settle his claim of unfair trade practices. During that meeting, Hynes reportedly said he had sent other letters to other hair salons and was currently in negotiations with these businesses and their attorneys.

The lawsuit was originally dismissed in 2022, but Hynes appealed to the state Supreme Court, which ruled in 2023 that the case ought to go to trial. Under the annulment law, Hynes’ conviction is a fact that is not true, the Supreme Court ruled, unless the subsequent annulment is also acknowledged.

“The fact that [Hynes] was convicted undeniably exists, but as a matter of New Hampshire law, upon annulment, it is false and misleading to fail to state that the conviction was annulled,” the Supreme Court ruled. “In the context of this case, to conclude otherwise could discourage those with annulled criminal records from seeking elective office, a constitutionally protected right.”

But the jury found, it seems, the conviction is true enough. 

Hynes abruptly resigned from the House last February. Soon after, it was learned he moved out of the district in late 2023 and rented out his house, but continued to claim his Bedford home as his residence.

New Hampshire’s top Democrat played fast and loose with the facts, the New Hampshire Supreme Court has ruled, and now he is facing a defamation lawsuit for spreading falsehoods about a GOP candidate.

The State’s highest court decided that a defamation lawsuit filed by state Rep. Dan Hynes (R-Bedford) against the state Democratic Party and its controversial chairman Ray Buckley can move forward in Hillsborough Superior Court.

At issue is a 2018 campaign flier claiming Hynes, who was running for state Senate at the time, was a convicted extortionist who had been disbarred. But the flier got several key facts wrong. Now Buckley and his party are exposed to potential liability.

“Dan Hynes targeted woman-owned businesses for extortion. Hynes was charged by Republican Attorney General Kelly Ayotte, convicted by the State of New Hampshire for ‘theft by extortion’ and disbarred,” the flier stated.

But Hynes’s conviction in a 2009 extortion by theft case was annulled, which makes the flier fundamentally false, the court ruled.

Rep. Dan Hynes (R-Bedford)

“Under New Hampshire law, annulled convictions should be treated as if they never happened. Because a criminal arrest, conviction, or sentence potentially implicates one’s personal freedom, these are the most extreme steps the State can take against individuals. The effect of New Hampshire’s annulment statute is to, as a matter of law, render the arrest, conviction, or sentence void for the purposes of public discourse,” the ruling stated.

“The fact that the plaintiff was convicted undeniably exists, but as a matter of New Hampshire law, upon annulment, it is false and misleading to fail to state that the conviction was annulled.”

And while Hynes was disciplined for his actions with a suspension of his law license, he was never disbarred.

That was enough of a mistake to warrant a trial, the Supreme Court ruled Thursday, overriding a lower court that had dismissed Hynes’ case.

One common defamation defense is to claim the person making the charge wasn’t aware of the facts and made an innocent mistake. Unfortunately for Buckley, the Supreme Court noted that the hit piece mailer included the addresses of internet links to relevant court documents, including Hynes’ annulment. The hit piece also included an internet link to documents concerning Hynes’ law license suspension, meaning Buckley and the NHDP knew or should have known he was not disbarred.

“The inclusion of this citation in the mailer could lead a reasonable jury to find that the defendants were subjectively aware that the plaintiff had not been disbarred and, therefore, subjectively aware that the language in the mailer was untrue,” the ruling states.

Buckley and the state party declined to comment on the court’s ruling or answer questions about the false statements in the campaign flier.

According to court records, Hynes sent a “Cease and Desist/Demand Letter” to Claudia Lambert, Claudia’s Signature Salon owner in Concord, in 2009. Hynes claimed that because Lambert’s salon charged women more money for haircuts than men or children, she was engaging in gender discrimination. 

Hynes’ letter demanded that she stop charging women more money and that she pay him $1,000. Lambert’s husband contacted the New Hampshire Attorney General’s Office, and during a sting operation, an investigator witnessed Hynes taking $500 to settle his claim of unfair trade practices. During that meeting, Hynes reportedly said he had sent other letters to other hair salons and was currently in negotiations with these businesses and their attorneys.

Hynes was convicted, ordered to pay restitution, and had his law license suspended for a year. The conviction was later annulled after completing all the terms of his sentence.