Nashua Judges have to stop enabling Nashua’s Corporation Counsel Attorney Bolton

On February 28, 2024, Nashua Superior Court held a Motions hearing where a plaintiff was representing herself against the City of Nashua. Attorney Bolton appeared to represent the City.

The City moved to dismiss. The plaintiff believed part of the claim should survive the motion to dismiss. Judge English, after listening to both sides, requested that the parties discuss when a trial would take place and agree on a structure and conference order. The Judge instructed the parties to submit their agreement to the Court within thirty days. Attorney Bolton responded" it's difficult for me to deal with the plaintiff. I will attempt to come to an agreement on a structure and conference order"

The Judge then conceded to Mr. Bolton's "I can't communicate with people” terms.  The Judge stated she will just make the ruling on the motion to dismiss and if any claims remain, she would order the parties to submit competing proposed structuring orders as are permitted to schedule. 

Judge English did not inquire into Bolton’s claim that the Plaintiff is “difficult to work with”, accepting his unwillingness to even discuss an agreement with the Plaintiff.

In a RTK hearing last year before Judge Colburn, Mr. Bolton got furious with a pro se litigant when she addressed service of her summons to the City. He raised his voice to the Judge aggressively arguing with her about the purpose of the hearing. The Judge quietly tried to calm Mr. Bolton.  It was a tense occurrence for all in the Courtroom particularly the lady seated before the Court in her first ever appearance.

The Judge attempted to soothe Mr. Bolton’s emotions and console him for being "offended" by the Plaintiff and Judge.

At my first pro se Right to Know hearing with Mr. Bolton, he informed Judge Temple that he refused to communicate with me. He asserted I had offended him so he would not communicate. The Judge responded by stating that he would not dictate how the parties communicate. This proclamation enabled Mr. Bolton to simply refuse reasonable communication, force everything into emails that have long response times or go unanswered, refuse phone calls, and then publicly complain that I am running up City costs wasting taxpayer dollars.

The above are instances of three different judges accommodating Mr. Bolton regardless of the burden his demands placed on plaintiffs and court time. It is puzzling why judges would enable Mr. Bolton by accepting his assertion that he would not communicate directly with opposing plaintiffs. If he could not, it would seem he was not capable of doing his job as Court rules require parties to confer.  Judges send a strong message that pro se litigants are the “lesser party”, after all we have no legal experience, so surely the City Attorney is more credible.

Why does Mr. Bolton become enraged about working with those who seek adjudication? Notably, he especially appears to display confrontational bullying behavior towards women who question him. Mr. Bolton chose to become a municipal attorney, which requires him to work with all citizens in the City not just those who agree with him. The 100+ pages of multiple police incident reports that Mr. Bolton has generated over 20 years further document an angry, aggressive, out-of-control man. 

Judges should stop coddling attorneys who cannot behave professionally with pro se litigants. Attorneys have a responsibility to communicate with all parties involved, regardless of their personal feelings toward them. Mr. Bolton shows he is unwilling to do so. The court needs to stop accommodating, comforting, and even enabling Mr. Bolton to conduct himself in an unprofessional manner. Judges in Nashua should cease tolerating Mr. Bolton’s unreasonable demands.

People questioning the government and seeking adjudication are not “problem people” who lose their right to communicate with municipal lawyers. Mr. Bolton’s behavior needs to conform to his professional standards or he should be required to move on.