ELLSWORTH — A judge has ruled that a former Gouldsboro man’s civil suit against two former Hancock County prosecutors may go forward.

In a 78-page decision, United States District Court Judge John A. Woodcock Jr. rejected the prosecutors’ appeal that Vladek Filler’s complaint be dismissed.

“We thought the ruling was entirely appropriate,” said Filler’s attorney, Thomas Hallett of the Portland firm Hallett, Zerillo and Whipple. “Judge Woodcock obviously understood the technical aspects of what we were pleading.”

There is a significant amount of history behind the civil complaint. In fact, Woodcock described the case as “a complicated saga.”

Filler, who now lives in Atlanta, claims that his constitutional rights were violated during a 2009 sexual assault trial, a charge on which he was later acquitted.

Filler filed his complaint on Jan. 9, 2015, in Hancock County Superior Court. The 103-page document alleges that prosecutors and law enforcement officers withheld evidence during the discovery process preceding the trial despite repeated requests for that information by Filler’s then defense attorney, Daniel Pileggi of the Ellsworth firm Roy, Beardsley, Williams and Granger.

Filler additionally alleges that video and audio evidence was mishandled and, in some cases, was fraudulent or edited in ways favorable to the prosecution.

The complaint lists 18 defendants. Among them are Hancock and Washington counties, their respective former sheriffs, Bill Clark and Donnie Smith, the city of Ellsworth and former Police Chief John DeLeo, the town of Gouldsboro and former Gouldsboro Police Chief Guy Wycoff as well as former District Attorney Michael Povich and members of his prosecutorial staff, Mary Kellett and Paul Cavanaugh.

Kellett and Cavanaugh filed motions in 2015 to have the civil suit dismissed for myriad issues.

Filler’s complaint is 103 pages.

Both Kellett and Cavanaugh argued that the court should dismiss Filler’s complaint because it has “violated Rule 8(a)(2)’s admonition that a complaint should be only a ‘short and plain’ statement of the claim, showing that the pleader is entitled to relief,” Woodcock stated.

“The court agrees with ADA Kellett and ADA Cavanaugh that Filler’s amended complaint is not a ‘model pleading,’” Woodcock said. “It runs 103 pages long, contains 667 separate paragraphs and is repetitive and confusing.”

“At the same time, Mr. Filler has named 18 defendants and the back story behind his allegations must necessarily be detailed and complicated and it is correct that this long and verbose pleading has placed each defendant on notice about what Mr. Filler is complaining,” Woodcock stated. “The court rejects the defendants’ effort to dismiss the amended complaint…”

However, Woodcock did agree in his Jan. 27 ruling to grant Kellett’s motion to dismiss a portion of the lawsuit in which Filler claims Kellett ignored “some evidence” she should have considered in initiating her prosecution of him.

The court is also granting Kellett’s motion to dismiss Filler’s defamation claim against her. Filler claims that Kellett’s providing his arrest warrant and mug shot to the press defamed him.

Woodcock also granted Cavanaugh’s motion to dismiss count eight of the suit, charging “negligent infliction of emotional distress.”

Cavanaugh stated he had no special relationship with Filler, which would have been needed to bring such an action against him.

Filler’s attorney Hallett said Kellett’s attorney is moving for a stay to appeal Woodcock’s decision.

An appeal would be heard by the First Circuit Board of Appeals in Boston, Hallett said. “We don’t know who the judge will be.”

An appeal would take “a while,” Hallett said. He estimated the appeal would take nine months to a year.

“We could also seek to have Judge Woodcock say that a stay isn’t appropriate and that we’ll move forward with discovery while the stay is going on,” Hallett said. Friday is the deadline for such a decision. “There’s a likelihood we’ll be opposing the stay.”