ORDER ON DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO DISMISS
the court is defendant's motion to dismiss. For the
following reasons, the motion is denied as to counts I-VI and
granted partially and denied partially as to counts VII and
VIII. Defendant's motion for a more definitive statement
ruling on a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim
pursuant to M.R. Civ. P, 12(b)(6), the court views the
"facts alleged in the complaint as if they were
admitted." Nadeau v. Frydrych, 2014 ME 154,
¶ 5, 108 A.3d 1254 (per curiam) (quotation marks
omitted). A complaint need only set forth the "elements
of a cause of action or allege facts that would entitle the
plaintiff to relief pursuant to some legal theory."
Id. Facts are read in the light most favorable to
the plaintiff. Id.
requires "a short and plain statement of the claim
showing that the pleader is entitled to relief." M.R.
Civ. P. 8(a). "Notice pleadings requirements are
forgiving; the plaintiff need only give fair notice of the
cause of action by providing a short and plain statement of
the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to
relief." Desjardins v. Reynolds, 2017 ME 99,
¶ 17, 162 A.3d 228 (quotation marks omitted).
I-IV: Prescriptive Easements
order to prevail on a motion to dismiss, plaintiffs must
allege in their prescriptive easement claim continuous use
for at least 20 years, a claim of right adverse to the owner,
and the use was with the knowledge and acquiescence of the
owner or was "a use so open, notorious, visible, and
uninterrupted that knowledge and acquiescence will be
presumed." Dowley v. Morency, 1999 ME 137,
¶ 23, 737 A.2d 1061 (quoting Shadan v. Town of
Skowhegan, 1997 ME 187, ¶ 6, 700 A.2d 245); see
also 14 M.R.S. § 812 (2016) ("No person ...
shall acquire a right-of-way or other easement through, in,
upon or over the land of another by the adverse use and
enjoyment thereof, unless it is continued uninterruptedly for
allege that they and their predecessors in interest have used
the property and the lower parking lot continuously for 20
years, that they have used the property adverse to the owner,
and that they did so with the knowledge and acquiescence of
the owner of the property or with a use such that knowledge
and acquiescence will be presumed. (Pls.' Compl.
¶¶ 4, 19-20, 22, 24-25, 27), Plaintiffs allege
sufficient facts to support their prescriptive easement
V: Declaratory Judgment
to the Paper Streets Act:
From the date of recording of a subdivision plan in the
registry of deeds, the public acquires rights of incipient
dedication to public use of the ways laid out on the plan. If
a proposed way laid out in the plan is not accepted by the
municipality within 20 years from the date of recording of
the plan, the public rights in that way terminate.
23 M.R.S. 3031(1) (2016). Plaintiffs allege that the
defendant's most recent subdivision plan depicting Ravine
Road was submitted in 2005. (Pls.' Compl. ¶ 32.)
Plaintiffs further allege that the town of Falmouth has not
acted in respect to Ravine Road. (Pls.' Compl. ¶
33.) Defendant argues that Ravine Road is a private way due
to its depiction on the Underwood Plan and the lack of
construction or use as a way. See Fournier v.
Elliot, 2009 ME 25, ¶ 15, 966 A.2d 410 ("[T]he
term 'proposed, unaccepted way' is indicative of the
status of a subdivision road as it pertains to its potential
adoption by a municipality, not as it pertains to its
VI: Quiet Title
claim for quiet title is brought pursuant to 23 M.R.S. §
3033 (2016) and 14 M.R.S. § 6651 (2016). (Pls.'
Compl. ¶¶ 35-39.) A party claiming ownership of a
vacated way must post a notice claiming ownership with the
registry of deeds where the way is located and give notice to
current owners of lots on the subdivision plan on which the
vacated way is located. 23 M.R.S. § 3033(1). Once notice
has been given, a claimant who disputes the first party's
claim must record a statement with the registry of deeds
within one year of the original notice specifying the claimed
interest and commence an action in equity within 180 days of
filing his statement. Id. § 3033(2). In the
following quiet title proceeding, the court may find in favor
of the claimant only if "the claimant has acquired an
interest in the way" pursuant to a quiet title theory,
and "a deprivation of the claimant's rights will
unreasonably limit access from his or her land to a public
way, a public body of water, or common land or a common
facility within the subdivision." Glidden v.
Belden,684 A.2d 1306, 1315 ...