A state Superior Court judge ruled that Epsom selectmen can’t fire Road Agent Gordon Ellis until the court decides on Ellis’ claims that he was unjustly fired by selectmen last year.

At a Thursday, May 10, hearing, Judge Carol Ann Conboy also ordered Ellis and selectmen to meet for a mediation, and urged both sides participate in “good faith.”

“That will go nowhere,” said Selectman John Klose, who said one of the reasons he ran for selectman was because he didn’t like the previous board’s treatment of Ellis. “This will just end up back in court.”

Ellis was handily elected to the road agent post – for the third time – in 2007, but is looking to recoup lost wages and attorney’s fees. His attorney, Lee Nyquist, also said Ellis seeks an official reinstatement for the time he was fired so the 60- year-old doesn’t lose five years toward his pension benefits.

Last October, selectmen – three of whom are still on the board – unanimously voted to fire Ellis for four charges related to his job performance.

The charges were that Ellis failed to get selectmen’s signatures for a work contract; that he allowed bridge work to commence without having the required DES permits in hand; that he failed to give selectmen and the town’s Road Advisory Committee, known as RAC, work schedules; and that he failed to submit a timely budget to the RAC.

In court filings, the town’s attorney, Catherine Costanzo, has supported the four charges as legitimate causes for Ellis’ dismissal.

“The facts establish that (Ellis) conducted his work in a negligent and intentionally uncooperative fashion,” Costanzo wrote in response to Ellis’ suit.

The town claims Ellis “both neglectfully and intentionally failed to carry out his instructions and duties,” according to court papers.

Meanwhile, Nyquist has argued that the charges are part of a “malignant plan” by selectmen to remove Ellis and that “minor and isolated acts and omissions ... amount to minutiae,” according to court filings.

Nyquist also said selectmen have engaged in numerous procedural errors since firing Ellis, in what he describes in a bench memorandum requesting injunctive relief as a “sad tale.”

In November, selectmen agreed to Ellis’ request to hold a public appeal hearing. At that hearing – which took place in the town’s fire station since nearly 200 people attended – Ellis and two other residents gave testimony on his behalf.

Selectmen didn’t testify during the meeting, and former Selectman Mary Frambach described the board merely as a fact-finding panel.

Weeks later, despite objections from Nyquist and Ellis, the board ruled on Ellis’ appeal in a nonpublic session that pushed about 75 eager residents out of the town hall chambers. Out of the public’s view, the board unanimously upheld the firing.

Nyquist claims the “evidence” used to justify the firing came from Selectmen Don Weaver and Bob McKechnie – both one-time members of the RAC – and neither of whom shared their information in public sessions.

“The path that the (board of selectmen) took down the road to terminating Mr. Ellis was one of one violation after another,” Nyquist said. “It is appropriate that the ultimate violation was presenting secret evidence in secret session to form the basis of whatever support there might be for the termination of Mr. Ellis.”

Selectmen claim, however, that their treatment of Ellis after his firing was fair, especially considering Ellis wasn’t legally afforded any public appeal hearing at all, said Costanzo.

“(Ellis) has complained vociferously about a whole host of supposed procedural errors in a hearing to which he had no legal entitlement in the first place,” Costanzo wrote.

The two sides are also in dispute about what evidence – including local newspaper reports – should be admitted into Ellis’ case.

Costanzo said Ellis has waged a public relations campaign and used the court to engage in political “mudslinging” for “what should be a simple and sober application of the law to the facts.”

A Superior Court hearing is scheduled for Sept. 18, after the two sides enter into their court-ordered mediation. Conboy said the town, in the meantime, if selectmen find cause, has the right to seek relief from her order that they don’t try to fire Ellis.

Nyquist said he’s not aware that selectmen are currently looking to discipline or fire his client.

But, he said, “History has taught us we must be ever-vigilant.”