COMMITTEE TO RE-ELECT JUDGE ROBERT NADEAU AND ROBERT M.A. NADEAU, Plaintiffs
TRAVIS LOVEJOY, Defendant.
ATTORNEY FOR PLAINTIFF ROBERT NADEAU NADEAU LEGAL PLLC
ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANTS: GENE LIBBY TYLER SMITH LIBBY
O'BRIEN KINGSLEY & CHAMPION
ORDER ON MOTION TO DISMISS
the Court is Defendant Travis Lovejoy's Motion to
Committee to Re-elect Judge Robert Nadeau and Robert M.A.
Nadeau bring this action seeking relief for the alleged
taking and vandalism of campaign signs by Defendant Lovejoy.
In the Complaint, Plaintiffs contend that Travis Lovejoy was
responsible for posting signs in public roadways advocating
against Nadeau's re-election without the sponsor, contact
information or posting duration; adding the word
"suspended" to signs promoting Nadeau's
re-election; and removing and causing injury to signs for
Nadeau's re-election from public roadways. Plaintiffs
assert counts of trespass to chattels and interference with
advantageous opportunities and seek punitive damages.
moves the Court to dismiss Plaintiffs' Complaint.
Standard of Review
order to survive a motion to dismiss for lack of standing,
the plaintiff must show, "that the party, at the
commencement of the litigation, has sufficient personal stake
in the controversy to obtain judicial resolution of that
controversy. Halfway House v. City of Portland, 670
A.2d 1377, 1379 (Me. 1996). "To have standing, a party
must show they suffered an injury that is fairly traceable to
the challenged action and that is likely to be redressed by
the judicial relief sought. Further, the injury must be
particularized. Put differently, it must be distinct from the
harm suffered by the public-at-large." Collins v.
State, 2000 ME 85, ¶ 6, 750 A.2d 1257.
review of a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim,
the court accepts the facts alleged in plaintiffs'
complaint as admitted. Saunders v. Tisher, 2006 ME
94, ¶ 8, 902 A.2d 830. The court "examine[s] the
complaint in the light most favorable to plaintiff to
determine whether it sets forth elements of a cause of action
or alleges facts that would entitle the plaintiff to relief
pursuant to some legal theory." Doe v. Graham,
2009 ME 88, ¶ 2, 977 A.2d 391 (quoting
Saunders, 2006 ME 94, ¶ 8, 902 A.2d 830).
"For a court to properly dismiss a claim for failure to
state a cause of action, it must appear 'beyond doubt
that [the] plaintiff is entitled to no relief under any set
of facts that might be proven in support of the
claim.'" Dragomir v. Spring Harbor Hosp.,
2009 ME 51, ¶ 15, 970 A.2d 310 (quoting Plimpton v.
Gerrard, 668 A.2d 882, 885 (Me. 1995)).
moves the Court to dismiss Plaintiffs' Complaint as to
Plaintiff Robert Nadeau for lack of standing and as to the
Committee to Re-elect Judge Robert Nadeau for failure to
state a claim.
argues that Nadeau does not have standing to bring the
current action because the Committee to Re-elect Judge Robert
Nadeau, rather than Nadeau personally, owned the signs.
Defendant argues that even if Nadeau personally purchased the
signs, he donated them to the Committee, leaving Nadeau with
no personal interest in the signs and therefore no standing
to sue. Moody v. State Liquor & Lottery
Comm'n,2004 ME 20, ¶ 8, 843 A.2d 43. In the
Complaint and subsequent filings, Nadeau asserts that the
signs were owned by both Nadeau personally and by the
Committee. For purposes of a motion to dismiss, the court
takes the facts alleged in the Complaint to be true.
Therefore, for the purpose of this Motion to Dismiss, the