A Boston federal appeals court has tossed former Raymond Selectman Dana Desjardins’ lawsuit back to the states level.

On Jan. 23, Chief Judge Sandra Lynch of the 1st Circuit Court of Appeals in Boston, upheld the dismissal of Desjardins’ 4th and 14th Amendment claims, and sent the state claims of defamation and “false light invasion of privacy” against Selectman Michael Reynolds back to Cumberland County Superior Court, arguing that the state law claims should be ruled on by the Maine courts.

“The issues are better resolved by the state courts, where this case began,” Lynch wrote.

In August 2013, Desjardins’ attorney, John Campbell, filed a complaint in Cumberland County Superior Court accusing Reynolds and Raymond Town Manager Don Willard of defamation of character, negligent infliction of emotional distress, intentional infliction of emotional distress and invasion of privacy, among other claims.

The lawsuit that led to the appeal was the result of nearly a year of what Desjardins called “harassment” by Willard and Reynolds, beginning with an incident on Jan. 8, 2012, when a Cumberland County sheriff’s deputy pulled over Desjardins on his way to a selectmen’s meeting for speeding 5 miles per hour above the limit. Desjardins argued that Willard and Reynolds used a December 2011 selectmen’s meeting – and the allegation that he had attended drunk – as a false pretext to ask the sheriff’s deputy to pull him over. Desjardins is seeking undisclosed damages.

In fall 2013, Willard and Reynolds’ attorney, Daniel J. Murphy of the Bernstein Shur law firm, moved the suit to U.S. District Court and filed two motions on behalf of each client to dismiss the case. Desjardins opposed the motions. Following a June 20, 2014, ruling by U.S. District Court Judge Nancy Torreson to dismiss the complaint “in its entirety,” Campbell appealed the case to the United States 1st Circuit Court of Appeals in Boston.

At a Jan. 6 oral argument, members of the circuit court’s three-judge panel advised Campbell to drop the claims against Willard. Campbell subsequently dropped Willard from the case. During the oral argument, Judge Bruce Selya said that Reynolds had sent emails about Desjardins that were “arguably defamatory.”

In her Jan. 23 written decision, Lynch wrote that Desjardins’ federal claims were implausible.

“There is no proximate causation between Reynolds’ actions and the allegedly unconstitutional traffic stop,” she wrote.

Lynch also described the remaining state claims regarding defamation and invasion of privacy as “the heart of this case.”

To date, Murphy has successfully used Maine’s statute barring strategic lawsuits against public participation (SLAPP) – expensive lawsuits designed to bully a party into silence – to prevent the state law claims from proceeding to trial. The anti-SLAPP statute, enacted in 1995, is designed to protect a party’s right to freedom of speech and to petition government officials. Desjardins and Campbell argue that the anti-SLAPP statute should not prevent a trial.

In her decision, Lynch argued that the Maine courts must resolve the anti-SLAPP question.

In an interview, Reynolds said that the circuit court’s decision to dismiss the federal claims and remand the state claims indicated that the decision was in his favor.

“The district court dismissal still stands,” Reynolds said. “All the federal court said is ‘We’re going to dismiss all seven of Don’s counts and five of Mike’s counts as being not plausible. We do not feel comfortable ruling on the two state counts.’ ”

Desjardins also applauded the decision.

“What happened in Boston was a victory for my side,” he said. “Yeah, we had to give up something, but guess what, we can bring this all back in the state court. I don’t think everybody that thinks they got away with what they got away with are out of the clear yet.”

Desjardins declined to identify whether he was referring to Campbell’s decision to drop the claims against Willard.

In an interview, Campbell said he would not draw up new claims against Willard now that the case has returned to the state courts and could potentially go to trial.

“I have no such plans,” he said.

If the Superior Court rejects the use of anti-SLAPP, the claims of defamation and invasion of privacy would be heard in a trial. If the court upholds Murphy’s use of anti-SLAPP, Campbell said he would appeal the case to the Maine Law Court. In that case, the Law Court would be Desjardins’ final remaining option, Murphy said.

“If judgment were entered in favor of Mike Reynolds, Desjardins could try to appeal it to the Maine Supreme Court, and that would probably be the last court available,” he said.