The $3 million lawsuit brought by a former National Guard colonel against four top Guard administrators has been scheduled for trial in U.S. District Court in Bangor.

The lawsuit, brought by Richard Wright of Bangor, a former Guard colonel who claims that his constitutional rights were violated after he reported safety violations and alleged misuse of military aircraft, has been placed on the January 1993 trial list of the federal court.

The case, however, may not reach the trial stage. The federal attorney representing the defendants has filed a motion for a summary judgment, a decision made in favor of the Guard administrators based on law, rather than the facts of the case.

“I think the law is clear that these claims shouldn’t be decided in federal court,” said George Dilworth, the assistant U.S. attorney from Portland representing the Guard officials.

Attorney Peter Anderson of Bangor, who represents Wright, has yet to respond to the motion. As a result, Dilworth said he didn’t expect an answer from U.S. District Judge Morton A. Brody until next month.

Anderson was unavailable for comment because he reportedly was on vacation this week.

Wright, a former deputy commander of maintenance, filed his lawsuit against the four administrators, alleging that he was demoted and his employment was terminated in 1990 after he reported the problems. The Maine Human Rights Commission ruled unanimously in July 1991 that the Maine Air National Guard had violated Wright’s rights.

The four defendants are: Maj. Gen. Ernest C. Park, former adjutant general; Brig. Gen. Nicholas Eremita of Brewer, chief of staff of the Air Guard; Col. Wilfred Hessert, wing commander; and Brig Gen. Nelson E. Durgin, adjutant general.

According to the government’s motion, the case should be decided in favor of the four administrators because the plaintiff presented “a non-justiciable military controversy.” The case involved “military personnel matters” and the conflict was “an intraservice military controversy,” stated the document.

Wright’s claims are “of little weight and are weak on merits,” because he hadn’t provided any evidence to support them, stated the court document.

At his deposition, the former colonel named more than 20 people who supposedly were part of a conspiracy against him, including Gov. John R. McKernan and McKernan’s former legal counsel, according to the motion.

Questioning his claim of being demoted because he was a whistleblower, the motion pointed out that Wright admitted at his deposition that he first called a whistleblower’s hot line secretly, without his superior’s knowing about the call.

Judicial review of the matter would interfere with the military’s functioning, according to the motion.

“Judicial review of this claim would interfere tremendously with military commanders’ ability to promote, reassign, discipline, and direct their subordinates,” stated the motion.