The opinion
STATE OF MAINE SUPERIOR COURT
CIVIL ACTION
KENNEBEC, ss. DOCKET NO. CY-02-222
DAM. xe/} = 3/7 /300%
RUTH WALKER, as next
friend and o/b /o EMILY WALKER,
- Plaintiff
v. ORDER ON MOTION
. TO DISMISS
MAINE SCHOOL ADMINISTTRATIVE mn
UNION #42, et al.,
Defendants
This matter is before the court on motion of Maine School Administrative Union
#42 (“Union #42”). This is an action brought by the mother of a student at Maranacook
High School against Union #42 and the adult in charge of a Life Skills Classroom. The
defendant alleges physical and emotional abuse. Union #42 argues that it must be
dismissed because it had no authority, and therefore no responsibility, to prevent the
alleged abuse.
The defendant argues that school unions have no authority with respect to the
operation or control of the schools, or the teachers employed at the schools, within a
union because a school union is not a school administrative unit. See 20-A M.R.S.A.
§ 1(25). The functions of a school union are performed by a union committee. 20-A
M.RS.A. § 1902. The school union committee acts as an agent for the municipal
school’s units that are members of the school union. The duties of a school union
committee are to employ a superintendent, fix his or her salary, provide an office with
supplies and assistance, determine the services to be performed by the superintendent
in each unit, and apportion the costs of the superintendent’s employment among the
members of the union. 20-A M.RS.A. §§ 1051, 1053, 1054, 1902. There is no statutory
provision that specifically authorizes the school unions to direct, supervise or discipline
teachers or students. The defendant goes on to argue that school unions do not employ
_ teachers, rather superintendents employ teachers. 20-A M.R.S.A. § 13201. The
authority to dismiss teachers is vested in the school board. 20-A M.R.S.A. § 13202.
Therefore, Union #42 argues that defendant adult supervisor was not an employee of
Union #42.
Plaintiff responds to defendant’s argument by reciting the same statutory
provisions. School unions provide a joint superintendent for each of the school units
comprising the union. Unions are formed for the purpose of joining administrative
services. 20-A M.R.S.A. § 1. A school union committee has full authority over
employing and supervising the superintendent. 20-A M.R.S.A. § 1902. The union
committee is made up of representatives from each school unit and the committee acts
as an agent for each of the school units. 20-A M.R.S.A. § 1902. Finally, the plaintiff
points out that the union may also assume additional responsibilities delegated to it by
the school boards of the school administrative units comprising the school unions. 20-A
M.R.S.A. § 1902(3)(F).
Both parties provide a correct recitation of the statutory provisions. This court
can interpret those statute positions to support the defendant’s position and can
interpret those same provisions to support the plaintiff's position. This is a motion to
dismiss. A motion to dismiss requires the court to consider only the allegations in the
complaint and to accept them as a fact for purposes of making its decision. While the
complaint is deficient in failing to expressly state that the adult defendant is an
employee of the Union #42 or that Maranacook High School is a unit within Union #42,
the court must infer that the allegation that the school union owed a duty to the plaintiff
2
is based upon those missing assertions. Considering the terms of the complaint as
sufficient to support some theory of liability would include evidence that an unnamed
school board had authority to discipline and dismiss teachers' or other staff through the
superintendent by virtue of 20-A M.RS.A. § 1902(3)(F) by the delegation of
responsibility to the school union with regard to those employees. Accordingly, the
court need not interpret the statutory provisions because there are insufficient facts to
establish the authority in this particular school union.
The entry will be:
Defendant Maine School Administrative Union #42’s motion to
dismiss is DENIED.
Z
Dated: March 7, 2003 _ ep
“Donald H. Marden
Justice, Superior Court
1 Nowhere in the complaint does it say that the adult is a teacher.
3
"RUTH WALKER - PLAINTIFF
19 BLAKE ROAD
MONMOUTH ME 04259
Attorney for: RUTH WALKER
VERNE E PARADIE JR
TRAFTON & MATZEN
“PO BOX 470
AUBURN ME 04212-0470
vs
MAINE SCHOOL ADMINISTRATIVE UNION #42 - DEFENDANT
Attorney for: MAINE SCHOOL ADMINISTRATIVE UNION
#42
MELISSA HEWEY
DRUMMOND WOODSUM & MACMAHON
245 COMMERCIAL ST.
PO BOX 9781
PORTLAND ME 04104-5081
Attorney for: MAINE SCHOOL ADMINISTRATIVE UNION
#42
HEATHER TALBOT
DRUMMOND WOODSUM & MACMAHON
245 COMMERCIAL ST.
PO BOX 9781
PORTLAND ME 04104-5081
AMY CUMMINGS - DEFENDANT
P.O. BOX 24
STRONG ME 04983
Attorney for: AMY CUMMINGS
MICHAEL E SAUCIER
THOMPSON & BOWIE
THREE CANAL PLAZA
PO BOX 4630
PORTLAND ME 04112-4630
MARANACOOK COMMUNITY SCHOOL DISTRICT - DEFENDANT
RICHARD ABRAMSON ~- DEFENDANT
SUPERIOR COURT
KENNEBEC, ss.
Docket No AUGSC-CV-2002-00222
DOCKET RECORD.
Filing Document: COMPLAINT Minor Case Type: CONSTITUTIONAL/CIVIL RIGHTS
Filing Date: 10/21/2002
Docket Events:
10/22/2002 FILING DOCUMENT - COMPLAINT FILED ON 10/21/2002
10/22/2002 CERTIFY/NOTIFICATION - CASE FILE NOTICE SENT ON 10/22/2002
Plaintiff's Attorney: VERNE E PARADIE JR
MAILED TO ATTY. OF RECORD.
10/22/2002 Party(s): RUTH WALKER, EMILY WALKER
JURY FILING - DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL FILED ON 10/21/2002
Plaintiff's Attorney: VERNE E PARADIE JR
JURY FEE OF $300.00 PAID.
Page 1 of 6
Printed on:
03/11/2003