access to the courts is limited "to those best suited to assert a particular claim"
How later courts described this case
- access to the courts is limited "to those best suited to assert a particular claim"
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
STATE OF MAINE SUPERIOR COURT
CUMBERLAND, ss CIVIL ACTION
DOCKET NO. AP-IO-p
OVERLOOK ROAD
ASSOCIATION,
(I/;V1- C t(Ji') - c/§je-:'o
, ,
Ij
Plaintiff
v. ORDER ON PLAINTIFFS
MOTION FOR CONTEMPT
DEBORAH 1. OOGLE,
TRUSTEE, DEBORAH 1. SeT', nr: 'i'~!{)'.f,C~
OOGLE REVOCABLE TRUST, c,ulr.';'.:·;'~\
Defendant
~.,. ,
Before the court is the plaintiff's motion for contempt. For the following reasons,
the motion is denied.
Background
This case involves the appeal of a small claims case, in which judgment was
entered against the defendant. (Tr. of 10 / 27/09 Hearing.) A judicial settlement
conference was conducted. The case was settled and the terms of the settlement were
placed on the record. (Tr. of 6/28/10.) The court signed two orders to file docket
entries. (Exs. A & H attached to Def.'s Opp. to Pl.'s Mot.)
After efforts to gather the required signatures to effect the settlement, the
necessary documents were not executed. During this time period, the defendant
reported the President of the Board of the plaintiff to the State of Maine Board of
Licensure for Professional Engineers for alleged ethical violations. The plaintiff
believed that the defendant violated the terms of the parties' mutual release by her
report of the President of the Board. (IQ. Ex. E.)
As a result of the impasse, the defendant filed a motion to enforce the settlement
agreement. The plaintiff sent a letter to the settlement justice and requested a finding of
contempt against the defendant. The matters were scheduled for hearing. By the time
1
of the hearing, the settlement documents had been signed. At the hearing, the
defendant withdrew the motion to enforce and the parties signed a stipulation of
dismissal. (Id. Ex. G.) The settlement justice did not act on the request for contempt.
Conclusions
First, based on the circumstances of this case, the plaintiff has not proved by clear
and convincing evidence that the defendant is in contempt. See M.R. Civ. P.
66(a)(2)(A)(i) & (ii); 66(d)(2)(D)(i) & (ii). Second, the individual the defendant reported
to the Board of Licensure is not a party to this case. The plaintiff requests, however,
among other relief, that the court order the defendant to withdraw her complaint to the
Board of Licensure, compensate the individual for attorney's fees and costs, and not
communicate with anyone except her attorney about this case. See Halfway House Inc.
v. City of Portland, 670 A.2d 1377, 1380 (Me. 1996) (access to the courts is limited "to
those best suited to assert a particular claim").
The entry is
The Plaintiff's Motion for Contempt is DENIED.
Date: April 5, 2011
ancy Mills
Justice, Superior C
2
Date Piled 02-11-10 CUMBERLAND Docket No. AP-10-07
County
Action _ _--"S-'-'MA=L=L_C-=.cLA=I=M=S~A=P_=_P=E=A=L _
OVERLOOK ROAD AT BRIDGTON ASSOCIATION OGLE, DEBORAH L. (TRUSTEE)
VS.
Plaintiff's Attorney Defendant's Attorney
KAREN JM MITCHELL, ESQ. -C-HfH·f,..~-tr;--fl1\o~;-~Qw/drew9-28-10
ALAN E. WOLF, ESQ. ~-fr~-
294 MAIN STREET, PO BOX 275 -ffiffi-~~
CUMBERLAND, ME 04021-0275 ~-irlffi-;--MH-~:HH
CHRISTOPHER PAZAR ESQ
DRUMMOND & DRUMMOND
ONE MONUMENT WAY
PORTLAND ME 04101
Date of
Entry