Robert Fojo is one of the few attorneys in the state pushing back against out-of-hand pandemic politics and has filed numerous lawsuits against state and local mask mandates. But that’ll have to wait. The State Supreme Court just suspended his law license suspended.
According to recently filed court paperwork, Fojo is alleged to have mishandled nearly $100,000 in client funds, including payments for personal injury claims and a contract dispute. On December 21, the New Hampshire Supreme Court temporarily suspended Fojo’s license to practice law in the state, writing that the move was “necessary to protect the public and to preserve the integrity of the legal profession.”
Fojo has admitted to the oversights and accepted some form of discipline, but his lawyer disputes the need for suspension. “There is no emergency, no immediate harm to the public, and no justification for an immediate suspension,” attorney William Saturley, who is representing Fojo, wrote in court paperwork.”
I can’t speak to that though I can say that politicians, many of whom are lawyers, screw up their finances and violate those laws all the time. No one suspends them. So, the dispensation of temporary ex-communication could be political.
While His Excellency has sworn off mask mandates, the State Supreme Court has several Sununu appointees on it, and he has no issue with local governments imposing the mandates. His administration is also fine with workplace discrimination when it comes to forcing pharmaceuticals into a person as a condition of employment.
This suggests (to me) the potential for inside baseball, and the New Hampshire Bar and Court system are notoriously tribal and vindictive.
Fojo has been making waves and pushing buttons. It is not uncommon for people marked as troublemakers to find themselves the object of scrutiny from any number of government agents looking for anything to slow them down or derail them.
The next step, I suppose, is figuring out how often this sort of accounting problem occurs and what, if anything, is the a-typical remedy.
If it’s not the suspension of a law license, then politics is probably the reason, and Fojo might be doing right by the public and not the people in power. The State’s response is to derail him, even if it’s only temporary.
As for his lawsuits, I have no objection to the fight. I don’t think kids need to wear masks. The medical science proved that and until they started jabbing them they were not a vector. The Vaccine could make them one and more susceptible to COVID (also proven by science) – but masks won’t help that either. But I’ve read the statute (RSA 126-U:4), and I don’t see that carrying the day beyond a wide interpretation.
I’d like it to apply, don’t get me wrong, but I’m not convinced it does or that it will. I think parents will need to continue to make their concerns heard while they work to replace school boards to affect policy change.
Until then, we should keep looking for a means to end the useless mandates as they are harmful to kids. I’m just not convinced we’ve found it.
Attorney Robert Fojo will appear before a judge on January 4 for a hearing on his temporary suspension.