Brooks v. Connelly

CourtSuperior Court of Maine
DecidedOctober 31, 2022
DocketCUMap-19-31
StatusUnpublished

This text of Brooks v. Connelly (Brooks v. Connelly) 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.

Bluebook
Brooks v. Connelly, (Me. Super. Ct. 2022).

Opinion

STATE OF MAINE SUPERIOR COURT CUMBERLAND, ss. CIVIL ACTION Docket No. AP-2019-31 ) SONIA BROOKS, ) ) Appellee/Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) ORDER DISMISSING APPEAL ) MICHAEL CONNELLY, as Trustee ) of MADOLYN ROWE REALTY ) TRUST, ) ) Appellant/Defendant. )

Before the Court is an appeal brought by Appellant/Defendant Michael Connelly,

as trustee of Madalyn Rowe Realty Trust, from the judgment of the District Court

(Portland, Woodman, J.) in this small claims action. The District Court rendered judgment

in favor of Appellee/Plaintiff Sonia Brooks, who alleged that Appellant wrongfully

withheld a portion of her security deposit. No claims were brought against Michael

Connelly in his individual capacity. Although the Notice of Appeal was timely filed, it

was signed only by Mr. Connelly.

Maine Rule of Civil Procedure 11 requires every pleading and motion to be signed

by an attorney of record or, if a party is not represented by an attorney, by the party. An

unsigned motion or pleading should not be accepted for filing and can have no legal

effect. M.R. Civ. P. 11. This rule extends to pleadings that are signed by a person who

does not have authority to represent a party in court. See Haynes v. Jackson, 2000 ME 11, 'l[

15, 744 A.2d 1050.

To the Court's knowledge, Mr. Connelly is not licensed to practice law in Maine.

Trusts, like estates or corporations, are entities separate from the people who administer

them, and must be represented by an attorney. See State v. Simanonolc, 539 A.2d 211, 12-3

I l/ I ~O" -, c1-"'a- Page 1 of 2 (Me. 1988); Land Mgmt., Inc. v. Dep't of Env't Prat., 368 A.2d 602, 603-04 (Me. 1977); Boutet

v. Miller, No. CV-00-698, 2001 Me. Super. LEXIS 34, at *3 (Mar. 8, 2001). Mr. Connelly,

therefore, cannot represent Madalyn Rowe Realty Trust before the Court.

The appeal filed and signed by Mr. Connelly cannot be given any effect and should

not have been accepted for filing. Accordingly, the appeal must be dismissed.

The entry is:

Appeal DISMISSED. Judgment of the District Court AFFIRMED.

The Clerk is directed to incorporate this Order into the docket by reference

pursuant to Maine Rule of Civil Procedure 79(a).

Dated: _.,__l"-"O+l-'--'1'---'1+/'"";;"'"'o'-"'J=),c,.___ I I

Page 2 of 2

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Haynes v. Jackson
2000 ME 11 (Supreme Judicial Court of Maine, 2000)
Land Management, Inc. v. Department of Environmental Protection
368 A.2d 602 (Supreme Judicial Court of Maine, 1977)
State v. Simanonok
539 A.2d 211 (Supreme Judicial Court of Maine, 1988)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Brooks v. Connelly, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/brooks-v-connelly-mesuperct-2022.