Bisson v. Hannaford Bros. Co.
This text of Bisson v. Hannaford Bros. Co. (Bisson v. Hannaford Bros. Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Superior Court of Maine primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
STATE OF MAINE SUPERIOR COURT SAGADAHOC, ss CIVIL ACTION DOCKET NO. CV-04-044 N N ~ s A ! ~ -ra!~(oS BRENDA BISSON f / k/ a BRENDA KNIGHTLY-ROGERS,
Plaintiff
ORDER ON MOTION TO DISMISS
HANNAFORD BROS. CO., Defendant
Defendant Hannaford Bros. Co. moves to dismiss the plaintiff's complaint
because, pursuant to the requirements of the Maine Health Security Act, the three-year
statute of limitations for this action had expired when the complaint was served on
9/21/04. See 24 M.R.S.A. § 2902 (2000). For the following reasons, the motion is
granted.
In her complaint, the plaintiff alleges negligent preparing and dispensing of
prescription drugs by the defendant's pharmacy. See Complaint, ¶ ¶ 3, 6, 7-9. In
response to the motion to dismiss, the plaintiff argues that the defendant's pharmacists
are not health care practitioners.1 See Pl.'s Mem. at 1-3; 24 M.R.S.A. 5 2502(1-A) (2000). Under section 2502(1-A),
'Health care practitioner' means physicians and all others certified, registered or licensed in the healing arts, including, but not limited to, nurses, podiatrists, optometrists, chiropractors, physical therapists, dentists, psychologists, and physicians' assistants.
24 M.R.S.A. 5 2502(1-A). Under section 2502(6),
' Nothing in the plaintiffs complaint or the plaintiffs memorandum suggests that anything other than the actions of the defendant's pharmacists are at issue in this case. 'Action for Professional Negligence' means any action for damages for injury or death against any health care provider, its agents or employees, or health care practitioner, h s agents or employees, whether based upon tort or breach of contract or otherwise, arising out of the provision o r failure to provide health care services.
24 M.R.S.A. § 2502(6) (2000).
The reach of the Maine Health Security Act has been interpreted liberally. See Dutil v. Burns, 674 A.2d 910, 911 (Me. 1996) ("broad statutory definition . . . reveals the
legislature's intention that the MHSA fully occupy the field of claims brought against
health care providers."); see also Brand v. Seider, 1997 ME 176, ¶ 5, 697 A.2d 846, 847-48
(Maine Health Security Act applied to plaintiff's claim that defendant, plaintiff's
counselor, disclosed confidential information to others); Thayer v. Tackson Brook Inst.,
Inc.,584 A.2d 653, 654 (Me. 1991) (Maine Health Security Act applied to claim by plaintiff who was visiting a patient at JBI).
The allegations in the complaint constitute an action for professional negligence
because the alleged actions of the defendant's pharmacists arise out of the provision o r
failure to provide health care services. See 24 M.R.S.A. § 2502(2) & (6) (2000); see also
Dupuis v. Cancer Screening Servs., 1997 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2456 *4 (D. Me. Feb. 13, 1997);
Johnson v. Transplantation Research Found., 2004 Tex.App. LEXIS 10777 *6 (not
designated for publication); Delcambre v. Blood Sys., Inc., 893 So.2d 23/28-29 (La. 2005). The entry is
Defendant Hannaford Bros. Co.'s Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED.
Date: October 11, 2005 i v'Nancy Mills !,I ust ti&, supehor Court BRENDA BISSON - PLAINTIFF SUPERIOR COURT 122B MEADOWS RD. SAGADAHOC, ss . WEST BATH ME 04530 Docket No BATSC-CV-2004-00044 Attorney for: BRENDA BISSON DAVID J VAN BAARS - RETAINED 10/07/2004 SHANKMAN & ASSOCIATES DOCKET RECORD 101 PLEASANT STREET BRUNSWICK ME 04011
vs HANNAFORD BROTHERS CO INC. - DEFENDANT C/O SEVERIN BELIVEAU, CLERK 45 MEMORIAL CIRCLE AUGUSTA ME 04330 Attorney for: HANNAFORD BROTHERS CO INC. WENDELL LARGE - RETAINED 10/01/2004 RICHARDSON WHITMAN LARGE & BADGER 465 CONGRESS ST, SUITE 900 PO BOX 9545 PORTLAND ME 04112-9545
Attorney for: HANNAFORD BROTHERS CO INC. ELIZABETH STOUDER - RETAINED 10/01/2004 RICHARDSON WHITMAN LARGE & BADGER 465 CONGRESS ST, SUITE 900 PO BOX 9545 PORTLAND ME 04112-9545
Filing Document: COMPLAINT Minor Case Type: OTHER NEGLIGENCE Filing Date: 10/05/2004
Docket Events: 10/07/2004 FILING DOCUMENT - COMPLAINT FILED ON 10/05/2004 Plaintiff's Attorney: DAVID J VAN BAARS
10/07/2004 Party (s): BRENDA BISSON ATTORNEY - RETAINED ENTERED ON 10/07/2004 Plaintiff's Attorney: DAVID J VAN BAARS
10/07/2004 Party (s): HANNAFORD BROTHERS CO INC. SUMMONS/SERVICE - CIVIL SUMMONS FILED ON 09/21/2004 SERVED IN HAND TO SEVERIN BELIVEAU, ESQ.
10/07/2004 CERTIFY/NOTIFICATION - CASE FILE NOTICE SENT ON 10/05/2004 ISSUED TO D. VAN BAARS, ESQ.
10/13/2004 Party (s): HANNAFORD BROTHERS CO INC. RESPONSIVE PLEADING - ANSWER FILED ON 10/01/2004 Defendant's Attorney: WENDELL LARGE & E. STOUDER, ESQ.
10/13/2004 Party(s): HANNAFORD BROTHERS CO INC. ATTORNEY - RETAINED ENTERED ON 10/01/2004~ Defendant's Attorney: WENDELL LARGE
Page 1 of 4 Printed on: 10/20/2005
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Bisson v. Hannaford Bros. Co., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bisson-v-hannaford-bros-co-mesuperct-2005.