Burroughs v. Reeves

• Court: Superior Court of Maine
• Decided: January 30, 2013
• Docket: CUMcv-12-353
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

STATE OF MAINE SUPERIOR COURT CUMBERLAND, ss CIVIL ACTION -,,, Docket No. CV,-;12-353 IllI'1'1 ," \._, .\', .'- ·/ 'J '\' J • '"1 "

ELIZABETH BURROUGHS, I

Plaintiff

v. ORDER ON MOTION TO DISMISS COUNTERCLAIM MARIANNE REEVES,

Defendant

Before the court is the plaintiff's motion to dismiss defendant's counterclaim.

For the following reasons, the motion is granted in part and denied in part.

The plaintiff alleges the parties were involved in a relationship from 2002 until

2011. In her nine-count complaint, the plaintiff asserts legal and equitable claims

arising out of real estate owned by the parties in joint tenancy and a home equity line of

credit.

In her counterclaim, the defendant alleges that the parties were romantic

partners until 2011. She states further that the plaintiff adopted a child. Finally, she

alleges that the parties acquired property jointly and in separate names and the

defendant contributed her income to debts and expenses. The defendant seeks an"

accounting, an equitable division of property, and a determination of parental rights

and responsibilities and reasonable rights of visitation and contact with the minor child.

In her opposition to the motion to dismiss, the defendant inappropriately adds

allegations that do not appear in the counterclaim. (Def.'s Opp'n to Pl.'s Mot. Dismiss 2-

4.) She advances the following causes of action: implied-in-fact contract, quantum

meruit, constructive trust, and quasi-estoppel. The defendant alleges she has standing to pursue her parental rights and responsibilities in Superior Court based on habeas

corpus and equity jurisdiction.

A pleading must set forth "a short and concise statement of the claim showing

that the pleader is entitled to relief." M.R. Civ. P. 8(a). On a motion to dismiss pursuant

to Rule 12(b)(6), courts "consider allegations of the complaint as if they were admitted

and in the light most favorable to the plaintiff." Me. Mun. Emps. Health Trust v.

Maloney, 2004 ME 51, 'IT 5, 846 A.2d 336. The First Circuit has stated that "a complaint

must include more than a rote recital of elements of a cause of action; it must include

'factual content that allows the court to draw the reasonable inference that the

defendant is liable for the misconduct alleged."' Artuso v. Vertex Pharm., Inc., 637 F.3d

1, 4 (1st Cir. 2011).

Except for incorporating the allegations in the complaint and answer and except

for the allegations regarding the child, the defendant has alleged in the counterclaim

that the parties were romantic partners, they acquired property jointly in both names

and separate names for the benefit of both, the defendant contributed her income to

debts and expenses of the partnership, and the partnership ended. These allegations

cannot be considered even a "rote recital of elements of a cause of action" and do not

include factual content that provides the plaintiff "with fair notice of the claim" against

her. See Vahlsing Christina Corp. v. Stanley, 487 A.2d 264, 267 (Me. 1985.)

The claims regarding parental rights and responsibilities must be brought in the

District Court. 4 M.R.S. § 152(11) (2012); M.R. Civ. P. 100. No petition for writ of habeas

corpus has been filed. See Leonard v. Boardman, 2004 ME 108, 'IT 14, 854 A.2d 869.

Further, when the Law Court in Leonard remanded the case to the Superior Court, the

Law Court recognized "there may be some question as to [the Superior Court's]

authority to issue a title 19-A order because the District Court now has exclusive

2 jurisdiction over title 19-A proceedings." Id., 2004 ME 108,

relied upon by the defendant specifically provides that based on statutory revisions

made after the filing of the action in C.E.W. v. D.E.W, future actions requesting a

determination of parental rights and responsibilities "will fall within the exclusive

jurisdiction of the District Court." C.E.W. v. D.E.W., 2004 ME 43,

1146.

The entry is

The Plaintiff's Motion to Dismiss Defendant's Counterclaim is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part.

To the extent the Counterclaim can be read to request an equitable partition of real property, which is also sought by the Plaintiff, the Motion to Dismiss is DENIED.

The Defendant's Counterclaim for an accounting and an equitable division of property is DISWSSED pursuant to M.R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6).

The Defendant's request for a determination of parental rights and responsibilities and visitation is DISMISSED pursuant to M.R. Civ. P. 12(b)

January 29, 2013

3 ELIZABETH BURROUGHS VS MARIANNA REEVES UTN:AOCSsr -2012-0080548 CASE #:PORSC-CV-2012-00353

01 0000002126 CLOUTIER, JAMES F 465 CONGRESS ST STE 8 PORTLAND ME 04101 F MARIANNA REEVES DEF RTND 08/28/2012

02 0000008349 NUZZI, DANIEL 184 MAINE STREET PO BOX 3070 LEWISTON ME 04243-3070 F ELIZABETH BURROUGHS PL RTND 08/20/2012

03 0000004374 TORREGROSSA, ANNE 184 MAINE STREET PO BOX 3070 LEWISTON ME 04243-3070 F ELIZABETH BURROUGHS PL RTND 08/20/2012