Narbonne v. Pearl

• Court: Superior Court of Maine
• Decided: October 18, 2017
• Docket: ANDcv-16-042
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

(

STATE OF MAINE SUPERIOR COURT ANDROSCOGGIN, ss. CIVIL ACTION RECEIVED & FILEBOCKET NO. CV-16-042 STEVEN M. NARBONNE, OCTj 18 2017 Plaintiff ANDROSCOGGIN SUPE~!OR COURT V. ) ORDER ON PLAINTIFF'S MOTION ) FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT CHAD AV ARD PEARL, et al., ) ) Defendants. )

Before the Court is Plaintiff Steven M. Narbonne's ("Narbonne") motion for partial

summary judgment against Defendant Phillip Steven Audet (" Audet"). Narbonne

contends he is entitled to judgment against Audet on the issue of liability. Audet has not

responded to this motion or otherwise appeared in this case.

I. Background

On April 4, 2016, Narbonne filed a complaint naming Audet as one of six

defendants in this case. (Pl.'s Compl. Caption.) Audet was served on April 11, 2016 but

has not made an appearance. Count III of Narbonne's Complaint alleges that on July 5

and July 6, 2014, Audet "recklessly, knowingly and/ or intentionally caused bodily injury

to Plaintiff .... " (Id.

assault for "[o]n or about July 6, 2014 ... intentionally, knowingly or recklessly caus[ing]

serious bodily injury to" Narbonne, and he was convicted of this charge on September 4,

2015. (Pl.'s S.M.F. CJICJI 1-2.)

II. Standard of Review

Summary judgment is appropriate if, based on the parties' statements of material

fact and the cited record, there is no genuine issue of material fact and the moving party

is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. M.R. Civ. P. 56(c); Dyer v. Dep't ofTransp., 2008

ME 106, ':[ 14, 951 A.2d 821. "A material fact is one that can affect the outcome of the case.

1 of 3 A genuine issue of material fact exists when the factfinder must choose between

competing versions of the truth." Dyer, 2008 ME 106,

and quotation marks omitted). When deciding a motion for summary judgment, the court

reviews the evidence in the light most favorable to the non-moving party. Id.

When a plaintiff moves for summary judgment on its claims, the plaintiff has the

burden of establishing each element of its claims without dispute as to any material fact

in the record. Cach, LLC v. Kulas, 2011 ME 70,

for summary judgment is properly supported, the burden shifts to the defendant to

respond with specific facts indicating a genuine issue for trial. M.R. Civ. P. 56(e). If an

opposing party fails to properly respond, the moving party's factual assertions will not

be deemed admitted merely because of the opposing party's failure to respond. Cach, LLC,

2011 ME 70,

assertion with citation to the record. M.R. Civ. P. 56(h)(4); Cach, LLC, 2011 ME 70,

A.3d 1015. Therefore, the moving party still has the burden of establishing the absence of

a genuine issue of material fact. Cach, LLC, 2011 ME 70,

III. Discussion

Narbonne argues that Audet is collaterally estopped from denying liability in this

civil action based on his criminal conviction for aggravated assault. Under the collateral

estoppel doctrine, "when issues are actually litigated and finally adjudicated in a criminal

proceeding, the conviction conclusively establishes all facts essential to the final

judgment of conviction and is preclusive in favor of a third party in a subsequent civil

action against the defendant in the criminal case." Butler v. Mooers, 2001 ME 56,

A.2d 1034 (internal citation and quotation marks omitted). Audet was convicted of

committing a crime against Narbonne that contains essentially the same elements as

Narbonne's claim against Audet in Count III of Narbonne's complaint. The Court agrees

2 of 3 with Narbonne that, based on his criminal conviction for aggravated assault, Audet is

collaterally estopped from denying liability on Count III in this case. Because Audet is

estopped from contesting this matter, there is no genuine issue of material fact in dispute

as to Audet's liability on Count III, and Narbonne is entitled to judgment on this issue as

a matter of law.

IV. Conclusion

For the foregoing reasons, Plaintiff Steven M. Narbonne's motion for partial

summary judgment as to Defendant Phillip Steven Audet's liability on Count III of

Plaintiff's complaint is GRANTED.

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

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

Dated: ~/ / D1g'/ ; 'J

3 of 3 STEVEN M NARBONNE - PLAINTIFF SUPERIOR COURT ANDROSCOGGIN, ss. Attorney for: STEVEN M NARBONNE Docket No AUBSC-CV-2016-00042 JENNIFER FERGUSON - RETAINED FALES & FALES PA 192 LISBON STREET DOCKET RECORD PO BOX 889 LEWISTON ME 04243-0889

vs CHAD AVARD PEARL JUDGMENT - DEFENDANT

Attorney for: CHAD AVARD PEARL JUDGMENT JEFFREY P WHITE - RETAINED 05/31/2016 LAW OFFICE OF JEFFREY P WHITE 243 MOUNT AUBURN AVE, S-B-1 AUBURN ME 04210

ROXANNE M PEARL JUDGMENT - DEFENDANT

Attorney for: ROXANNE M PEARL JUDGMENT JEFFREY P WHITE - RETAINED 05/31/2016 LAW OFFICE OF JEFFREY P WHITE 243 MOUNT AUBURN AVE, S-B-1 AUBURN ME 04210

HILDA BRACKETT - DEFENDANT 575 WHITE OAK HILL ROAD POLAND ME 04274 Attorney for: HILDA BRACKETT EDWARD DILWORTH - RETAINED 07/18/2016 DOWS LAW OFFICE PA PO BOX 349 NORWAY ME 04268

JENNIFER SCRIBNER DISMISSED - DEFENDANT 143 OLD COUNTY ROAD OXFORD ME 04270 DANNYEL POULIN DISMISSED - DEFENDANT 28 MOREY AVE MECHANIC FALLS ME 04256 PHILLIP STEVEN AUDET - DEFENDANT 807 CUSHING ROAD WARREN ME 04864

Filing Document: COMPLAINT Minor Case Type: OTHER STATUTORY ACTIONS Filing Date: 04/04/2016

Docket Events: 04/05/2016 FILING DOCUMENT - COMPLAINT FILED ON 04/04/2016

04/05/2016 Party(s): STEVEN M NARBONNE ATTORNEY - RETAINED ENTERED ON 04/04/2016 Plaintiff's Attorney: JENNIFER FERGUSON

Page 1 of 6 Printed on: 10/27/2017