#

New Hampshire’s Supreme Court ruled this week that Granite State courts have seen enough of Portsmouth attorney Justin Nadeau, disbarring him after he was caught doctoring evidence in his ethics case before the Professional Conduct Committee.

“It’s difficult for me to imagine something worse for a lawyer to do,” one PCC member said, according to the court records.

Nadeau, once a Democratic candidate in the First Congressional District, was brought before the PCC after he allegedly got a client who was impaired by a traumatic brain injury, Exeter woman Shawn Fahey, to give him $300,000 in loans in 2018. Nadeau allegedly secured the loans with a condo he did not own, tax liens, and the anticipated proceeds from a pending defamation lawsuit he had against the Portsmouth Police Department.

Nadeau allegedly told Fahey until the defamation lawsuit was resolved he was “strapped for cash.”

The lawsuit against Portsmouth’s police stems from an arrest of Portsmouth man Christian Jennings. Jennings was allegedly found with quantities of marijuana, Ecstasy, amphetamines, a loaded gun, and $42,000 in cash. According to police, Nadeau was handling an $85,000 marina investment for Jennings before the arrest, though the marina deal never closed. Nadeau brought the lawsuit when police opened an investigation into whether or not he was laundering drug money. The defamation case was settled in 2019.

Nadeau also allegedly hid the $165,000 he collected after he sent Fahey to a Massachusetts attorney to handle her injury case. Nadeau reportedly collected referral fees from the Massachusetts attorney as well as other money related to Fahey’s case.

According to the Supreme Court’s disbarment order released Tuesday, Nadeau slow-walked producing documents related to the case to the PCC. The Democrat even destroyed his computer before the hearing. Nadeau claims he made all the appropriate conflict of interest disclosures and eventually produced printed copies of the letter he claimed he sent her.

However, James Berriman, the computer expert hired by the PCC, looked through Nadeau’s office server and found the dates on the documents Nadeau gave to the committee were fake, and the documents were created well after he took the money from Fahey.

“As a member of the PCC observed at oral argument before the PCC, ‘the Berriman Report and the spoliation of evidence, in my mind . . . is one of the most significant violations I have seen in decades of practice before the ADO before joining this committee,’” the court ruling states.

Nadeau argued that disbarment is too harsh a penalty, but the Court found that his “deliberate, multi-year effort to deceive the disciplinary authority” and the ethics complaints involved in Fahey’s case make un-lawyering him appropriate.

Nadeau’s father, J.P. Nadeau, agreed to resign from the New Hampshire Bar Association in 2009 after he was investigated for a conflict of interest for representing a construction company involved in a dispute with Justin Nadeau.

Nadeau once had hopes of higher office, running an ultimately unsuccessful campaign against then-Congressman Jeb Bradley (R). Nadeau’s campaign was spearheaded by Steve Marchand, Portsmouth’s former mayor who ,himself went on to unsuccessful runs for higher office. In recent years, Marchand has been warned by the New Hampshire Attorney General’s Office for skirting campaign laws.

New Hampshire taxpayers don’t have to pay a $537 million education spending bill just yet, as the New Hampshire Supreme Court stayed the decision in the ConVal lawsuit.

In a unanimous decision issued Wednesday, the Supreme Court put a hold on Rockingham Superior Court Judge David Ruoff’s November order that the state’s per-pupil spending must go up to at least $7,300. Ruoff had denied a motion to stay his decision pending appeal earlier this year.

Gov. Chris Sununu praised the stay decision, saying Ruoff’s ruling went too far.

“Today, the Supreme Court rightfully paused an attempt by one judge to usurp the power and preferences of both the legislative and executive branches,” Sununu said. “Grateful for the Supreme Court’s action to stay a decision that was so clearly overreaching.”

According to Senate President Jeb Bradley (R-Wolfeboro), implementing Ruoff’s order would wreck state finances, hurt lower-income communities, and eventually force an income or sales tax on Granite Staters.

“This decision could mean a $500 million spending increase for New Hampshire taxpayers and could cause reduced education funding for all the original towns that brought the Claremont education funding lawsuit by limiting the legislature’s ability to target special education aid to local school districts that need it the most,” Bradley said in a statement. “I remain optimistic that the Supreme Court will recognize that such huge financial decisions rest with representatives and senators that the people of New Hampshire have chosen.”

Lawmakers are looking for an affordable funding solution, and according to House Speaker Sherman Packard (R-Londonderry), the Supreme Court’s stay will give both houses time to keep working.

“We’re hopeful the Supreme Court has a different take on the matter than the lower court that will be less costly to taxpayers. The stay will allow the legislature more time to further analyze the situation,” Packard said.

The Peterborough-based Contoocook Valley Regional School District filed the lawsuit in 2019, arguing that the state’s education grant of $3,600 per pupil was far below the true cost and, therefore, unconstitutional. ConVal and the dozens of school districts that joined the lawsuit wanted closer to $10,000 per pupil.

Ruoff originally refused to set a dollar amount when he ruled the state violated the constitutional right to an adequate education, leaving that up to lawmakers. But a subsequent appeal to the state Supreme Court resulted in a 2021 order that forced Ruoff to come up with a figure.

Since the ConVal lawsuit was filed, lawmakers and Sununu have bumped up the grants to $4,100 per pupil, an amount Ruoff still found unconstitutionally low. Ruoff’s decision acknowledged it is up to the legislature to determine the funding but that it can be no less than the amount he set.

“What is the base cost to provide the opportunity for an adequate education 239 years after that fundamental right was ratified in our constitution? The short answer is that the legislature should have the final word, but the base adequacy cost can be no less than $7,356.01 per pupil per year, and the true cost is likely much higher than that. At a minimum, this is an increase of $537,550,970.95 in base adequacy aid to New Hampshire Schools,” Ruoff wrote.

The legal tussle over New Hampshire’s state spending for education “adequacy” is unrelated to another hot-button political issue: Taxpayers are already burdened with increasing education costs even as the number of students is declining.

The total cost of education in New Hampshire, including the portion paid through local property taxes, averages more than $20,000 per pupil. That’s up from about $11,000 total per pupil spending in 2000. Over the same time, the state’s student population has fallen by more than 20 percent. According to the Department of Education, student enrollment numbers in the Granite State have dropped from 207,684 in 2002 to 165,095 in 2023. That’s a decrease of 42,589 public school students, or about a 20.5 percent decline during the past 21 years.