Frankenfield v. Kennebec Bean Co., Inc.

• Court: Superior Court of Maine
• Decided: June 24, 2002
• Docket: CUMcv-01-636
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

STATE OF MAINE : . SUPERIOR COURT

CUMBERLAND, ss. ~ CIVIL ACTION DOCKET NO. CV-01-636

LEIGH R. FRANKENFIELD, o /a4 fy 20e Plaintiff, v. ORDER ON DEFENDANT’S

MOTION TO DISMISS PLAINTIFF’S DAMAGE CLAIM

KENNEBEC BEAN CO., INC., DONALD L. GARBRECHT

LAW LIBRARY Defendant.

JUN 95 2009 ORDER

The underlying complaint arises out of a business transaction gone awry. During the course of pleadings, the plaintiff filed a counterclaim to the defendant's counterclaim, which the court determined would be treated as an amendment to the complaint. The added claim was an assertion that the defendant had violated the antitrust laws of the United States and the State of Maine, including 10 M.R.S.A. § 1101 et seq. and 15 U.S.C. § 1 et seq. In conjunction with this assertion, the plaintiff conceded that “although [p]laintiff has not been damaged financially or monetarily, [p]laintiff has suffered loss of enjoyment of life, in that [p]laintiff derived great enjoyment and pleasure in planting and harvesting crops of dry beans, which is not now available to him without a market for his crop.” Plaintiff’s Reply to Counterclaim and Counterclaim p. 5, | 18. The plaintiff requested an award of damages for his loss of enjoyment of life. The defendant now seeks dismissal of the plaintiff's request for damages as to the antitrust claim.

Both the state and federal antitrust statutes require a business injury to permit 1

a person to recover damages from a violator of the antitrust statutes.* Claimants

have been denied recovery for non-business injuries. See Young v. Colonial Oil

Co., 451 F. Supp. 360 (M.D. Ga. 1978) (“Emotional distress to an individual is not a ‘business injury’ which is contemplated by the antitrust laws and is not, therefore, a

recoverable element of damages” under the Sherman Act); L’Atrella v. Weight

Watchers Int’l, 1998 WL 166467 (Conn. Super.) (“The plaintiff cannot recover these

personal injuries [- shock to her nervous system, migraines and loss of sleep -] under the antitrust statutes”). The court concludes that “loss of enjoyment of life” is a personal injury for which there is no recovery under either the federal or state antitrust statutes. Accordingly, the defendant’s motion to dismiss the plaintiff’s

antitrust damage claim is granted.

The entry is

The defendant’s motion to dismiss the plaintiff’s antitrust damage claim is GRANTED.

Dated at Portland, Maine this 24th day of June 2002.

obert E. Crowley Justice, Superior Court

1 Section 1104 of Title 10 of the Maine Revised Statutes Annotated allows

recovery for “[a]ny person . . . injured directly or indirectly in its business or property

..” Section 15(a) of Title 15 of the United States Code provides that “any person who shall be injured in his business or property” may recover.

2 Date Filed

11-14-01 Cumberland Docket No. CV-01~-636

County Action REMOVAL FROM D.C. - CONTRACT LEIGH R. FRANKENFIELD Vs KENNEBEC BEAN CO., INC. Plaintiff’s Attorney Defendant’s Attorney STEPHEN A. CANDERS, ESQ. ALTON C. STEVENS, ESQ. 11 Main Street, Suite 1 44 Elm Street, P.O. Box 708 Kennebunk, ME 04043 Waterville, ME 04903-0708 (207) 985-1199 (207) 873-0186 Date of Entry 2001 Nov. 15 Received 11-14-01: Defendant's Notice of Removal to Superior Court filed. All paperwork received from 9th District Court, Division of Southern Cumberland (District Court Docket # POR-CV-2001-1010). Nov. 26 Received 11-26-01: Plaintiff's Notification of Discovery Service filed. , Plaintiff Leigh R. Frankenfield's First Set of Interrogatories Propounded to Defendant Kennebec Bean Co., Inc. served on Alton C. Stevens, Esq., on 11-23-01. " " Received 11-26-01: . Plaintiff's Notification of Discovery Service filed. Plaintiff Leigh R. Frankenfield's First Request for Production of Documents to Defendant Kennebec Bean Co., Inc. served on Alton C. Stevens, Esq. on 11-23-01. Nov. 27 Received 11-27-01: Scheduling Order filed. (Crowley, J.) Scheduling Order filed. Discovery deadline is July 29, 2002. Copies mailed Stephen Canders, Esq. and Alton Stevens, Esq. on 11-27-01. Dec. 5 Received 12-05-01: Plaintiff's Reply to Counterclaim and Counterclaim with attached Exhibit A filed. " " Counterclaim Summary Sheet filed. Dec. 17 Received 12-17-01: Defendant's Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's Counterclaim filed. " " Defendant's Proposed Order filed. Dec. 18 Received 12-18-01: Defendant's Notification of Discovery Service filed. Defendant's Request for Production of Documents Propounded to Plaintiff served on Stephen A. Canders, Esq. on 12-18-01.