An attorney and elected probate judge for Hancock County has been suspended from practicing law after failing to demonstrate compliance with tax and child support obligations. The Maine Board of Overseers of the Bar, responsible for regulating attorneys in the state, had already placed William Blaisdell on probation due to these concerns.
The investigation into Blaisdell’s conduct began last year following a contempt finding by a Belfast judge, who cited his refusal to adhere to court orders. Although initially permitted to continue practicing law under supervision, Blaisdell did not fulfill the required conditions. This prompted Superior Justice James Martemucci to issue an order on April 7, highlighting Blaisdell’s disregard for legal mandates, which was deemed to threaten public welfare and the justice system’s integrity.
The suspension effectively halts Blaisdell’s judicial duties, having previously been suspended from overseeing probate court last fall. He had resumed his judicial role in January but remains restricted from accepting cases through the Maine Commission on Public Defense Services, which manages legal representation for those unable to afford private counsel. The recent order also appointed attorneys Paul Driscoll and Daniel Pileggi to assume responsibility for Blaisdell’s legal cases.
The Broader Impact
This situation underscores the significant responsibilities held by legal professionals and the severe implications of failing to meet their obligations. Blaisdell’s suspension serves as a cautionary tale within the legal community, emphasizing the critical importance of compliance with professional and legal standards. It also highlights the oversight role played by regulatory boards to ensure public trust in the legal system.
For residents of Hancock County and clients relying on Blaisdell’s services, this development could result in disruptions and potential delays in legal proceedings. The appointment of new attorneys to manage his cases aims to minimize these impacts, but some degree of inconvenience is anticipated. The case also reinforces the necessity for individuals in positions of power to uphold ethical standards, affecting public perception and trust in local governance and judicial processes.