Rep Leishman Lawsuit Tossed; Pan Am gets Revenge? - Granite Grok

Rep Leishman Lawsuit Tossed; Pan Am gets Revenge?

Railroad Track - Pan Am and Milford Bennington sparing match continuesDid Pan Am Railway just get some major payback on an ethics challenged State Rep who owns a competing Railroad company?

The Nashua Telegraph is reporting that Rep. Peter Leishman (D – Milford-Bennington Railway), recently re-elected to the NH House, just had his lawsuit thrown out by Judge Paul Barbadoro of the U.S. District Court in Concord.  Leishman was suing Pan Am Railways for allegedly violating a contract by refusing to let him operate on their track.  But apparently Pan Am can block Milford-Bennington from using their track and no amount of fussing by Rep Leishman will be able to change that.   The judge noted that he did not condone Pan Am’s conduct in barring Milford-Bennington but there was no legal reason to allow Leishman’s lawsuit against them to proceed.

Pan Am has to be excited about the ruling.  Keeping Milford-Bennington off their track sounds a lot like payback to me.  Payback for what you ask?

In a previous legislative life, when Rep Leishman was last in the House (2009/2010), he was investigated for ethics violations.  Seems like he was writing legislation that could lead to  the state ‘acquiring’ rail corridors that might be used for taxpayer subsidized commuter rail service.  (HB 613) Milford-Bennington could stand to profit from such an arrangement, since he also appeared to be simultaneously using his position on House committees that handles purchase and leasing arrangements with private rail companies and that funded the transportation department charged with managing those deals.  So his cozy relationship with the State transportation department, and his versatile authority would have give Milford-Bennington a leg up (on Pan Am Railways as it turns out.)

And the then Democrat majority barely slapped his wrist.

It centered around Pan Am getting an opportunity to bid on track whose lease had lapsed, but when they contacted the NH Transportation commissioner, George Campbell (made famous for this as well), Campbell told Pan Am that the Transportation Department

“…was currently seeking approval of his budget and that Representative Leishman’s membership on the House Finance Committee could adversely affect that budget if the commissioner were to cause any disturbances.”

This naturally became a he-said/he said argument but rather than question the motivations of a Democrat legislator who was also writing bills that could benefit his business the Democrat majority managed to underplay the controversy and the media never really cared enough to follow the scandal.   (You can read a bit  more rail dirt here, and then there is also this nice reminder of how the democrats scuttled corruption when they ran things.

As for the Judgement itself, Pan Am certainly could have worked with Leishman toward some equitable resolution.   But after getting screwed by him and his insider machinations, (the guy you folks in Peterborough just put back in Concord, against my better judgement), why would they want to?   This is a Democrat politician who was implicated in using the power of the state, and his influence on it, to hamper the bidding process and protect his own greedy interests.   The Democrat majority helped him and then let him off; the Republicans might be a bit more diligent.  And while he’s less likely to try anything that obvious without adequate cover, we should all keep a close eye on him.

And Pan Am?  They found a way to make him pay for squeezing them out of his inside deal.  Call it payback or revenge, either way he probably deserves it.

 

>