Successful in disqualifying Arkansas Secretary of State Mark Martin’s original lawyers, attorney Matt Campbell lost his related Freedom of Information Act lawsuit Tuesday when he failed to call any witnesses to support his accusations.
Campbell claimed that Martin, a first-term Republican, violated the open-records law by failing to fulfill Campbell’s document request in June with electronic copies as he had requested. The case came down to a single document that Martin offered Campbell on paper.
In a hearing that lasted four minutes, Pulaski County Circuit Judge Tim Fox threw out Campbell’s lawsuit on a motion from Deputy Secretary of State A.J. Kelly after Campbell rested his case without providing any testimony.
The proceeding had been scheduled to resolve Campbell’s 4½ -month-old complaint against Martin, who did not attend. Kelly and Martin’s counsel, Martha Adcock, were prepared to call three witnesses.
“This is a hearing. We take testimony and evidence at a hearing,” Fox told Campbell when the attorney said he would not have testimony. “The case is dismissed with prejudice.”
Campbell, a regular critic of Martin on his Democratic-leaning Blue Hog Report blog, told the judge only argument was needed for the hearing. Campbell said his dispute with Martin was solely about the interpretation of open-records law, making the case a legal question that required no witnesses. Campbell said he would appeal.
“It’s a purely legal argument,” Campbell said. “There are no questions of fact left.”
But court filings show Martin disputed that both sides agreed on the facts of the case.
Martin stated he had complied with state law, filings show. He questioned whether the records were public, stating in the pleadings that even if the records were public, they couldn’t be disclosed without redaction.
To provide Campbell with what he asked for would also require the secretary of state’s office to create a new document, which is not required by law, Martin argued. He also disputed that his office was a state agency and claimed he was entitled to sovereign immunity protection from the suit.
Campbell had requested emails and attached files exchanged between staff attorneys and an outside law firm that was hired to help defend the secretary of state in two discrimination and wrongful termination lawsuits. On his blog, Campbell questioned why Martin had paid private attorneys $103,746 when he was already paying more than $260,000 annually for a legal staff that included Kelly and Adcock. Martin’s hiring of a private firm appeared to be the first time the secretary of state had retained outside legal representation in almost 100 years, Campbell claimed on his blog.
When Martin retained the the Quattlebaum, Grooms, Tull & Burrow law firm to defend him against the open-records lawsuit, Campbell disputed the legality of that $200-per-hour hiring, citing Arkansas 25-16-702, which states that the Arkansas attorney general shall provide legal representation for all state officials and agencies unless the office waives representation. The law firm contended the hiring was proper because Martin was retaining it under a $265,012 “professional services” allocation from the Legislature.
But Fox, acting on Campbell’s motion, disqualified the law firm and struck all of the pleadings it had filed in the case. Martin could hire outside lawyers only if the attorney general declined to represent the office, the judge ruled. In response to the ruling, the state Democratic Party, calling Martin “irresponsible and reckless,” questioned whether he had committed a crime. Martin did not appeal, and his staff attorneys filed new pleadings.
Campbell sued Martin again under the open-records law in August, accusing the secretary of state of not complying with another document request involving contracts with private law firms. Campbell dropped that lawsuit after the records were released.
In October, Campbell filed a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit against Lt. Gov. Mark Darr after Darr redacted his personal cellphone number from records that Campbell was seeking about Darr’s travel expenses. Campbell said the law did not allow Darr to withhold that number. The attorney general is seeking to have the suit dismissed and the case is pending before Circuit Judge Mary McGowan.
Campbell had questioned the propriety of some of Darr’s official travel spending. Darr dropped out of a race for Congress after the Blue Hog Report pointed to thousands of dollars in spending. Last week, Darr promised to repay the state about $11,600 in mileage reimbursements and credit-card purchases deemed improper by state auditors.
Arkansas, Pages 9 on 12/18/2013