NEWPORT — The attorney for Claremont City Councilor Jonathan Stone said in court Thursday that details surrounding Stone’s record as a Claremont police officer, including a suspension and 2006 notice of termination, should have been purged from his personnel file years ago, and should not be disclosed to the public now.

Attorney Peter Decato made the argument during a hearing in Sullivan Superior Court over whether documents and internal investigations in Stone’s personnel file should be made public. Stone is a city councilor and Republican candidate for the New Hampshire House who left the police force in 2007, according to court documents.

The hearing follows an email City Manager Ed Morris sent to a freelance reporter for InDepthNH.org in late August, responding to a records request on Stone. In the email, Morris said that while a police officer, Stone faced 11 “sustained” findings of wrongdoing from internal investigations that are subject to disclosure.

Stone, who now works for the Vermont Department of Corrections and also helps run a gun shop in Claremont, is seeking a permanent injunction to bar the city from releasing details on his personnel file, saying to do so would be a breach of his privacy. Decato also asked that the city share Stone’s personnel file with him, saying he cannot argue what other documents should be exempt from disclosure without looking through the file.

Shawn Tanguay, an attorney for the city, suggested putting a protective order in place so that only Decato could review those files.

No one argued explicitly against Stone’s request for an injunction, though the city of Claremont in the past has sought clarity from the court over what should be released.

Much of Thursday’s hearing, which was the first court appearance on the injunction case, revolved around four of the internal investigations involving Stone’s conduct as a police officer.

Decato said that four of the cases, which Morris’ letter had indicated were substantiated, resulted in union-backed grievances that went to arbitration in 2006.

Under a “stipulated arbitration award,” Decato said, “no one would talk to the newspaper” and the Claremont police department’s disciplinary action against Stone would remain “confidential.” He also said the award included a section saying the city would “purge” Stone’s personnel file of all references to a “one-day suspension, and a March 2006 notice of termination and ‘all events leading up to them,’ ” DeCato said.

“Why is it there?” he asked. “Why would there be internal investigation reports still there, when there was an agreement to purge them?”

Decato said that a recent New Hampshire Supreme Court ruling that broadened the scope of what should be released about public employees should not pertain to Stone’s four cases, since the arbitration award over those grievances was confidential and came 14 years before the recent ruling.

Sullivan Superior Court Judge Brian Tucker did not issue a decision during Thursday’s hearing.

Tucker allowed Decato two weeks to file a memorandum arguing that the confidentiality agreement in the 2006 case takes precedence over the recent ruling.

Anna Merriman can be reached at amerriman@vnews.com or 603-727-3216.