Opinion
Civil No. 01-224-P-C.
February 16, 2005
BERT J ALLEN, III, Plaintiff, represented by BERT J ALLEN, III, NH, PRO SE.
YORK COUNTY JAIL, Defendant, represented by MICHAEL J. SCHMIDT, WHEELER AREY, P.A., WATERVILLE, ME.
DANIEL DOUBOUS, individually and in their official capabilities as officers of the York County Jail, Defendant, represented by MICHAEL J. SCHMIDT, WHEELER AREY, P.A., WATERVILLE, ME.
TAMMY LEONARD, individually and in their official capabilities as officers of the York County Jail, Defendant, represented by MICHAEL J. SCHMIDT, WHEELER AREY, P.A., WATERVILLE, ME.
LINDA MOOERS, Defendant, represented by JAMES F. MOLLEUR, SACO, ME.
MICHAEL J. SCHMIDT, WHEELER AREY, P.A., WATERVILLE, ME.
ORDER GRANTING IN PART DEFENDANT LINDA LOCKE f/k/a LINDA MOOERS' MOTION TO DISMISS
Now before the Court is Defendant Linda Locke f/k/a Linda Mooers' (hereinafter "Ms. Locke") Motion to Dismiss (Docket Item No. 169). Ms. Locke asserts that because she filed a petition for bankruptcy with the United States Bankruptcy Court and received a discharge in bankruptcy on July 11, 2003, during the pendency of the above-captioned lawsuit, and Plaintiff did not object to his debt being discharged in the bankruptcy proceeding, Plaintiff may not now maintain his cause of action against her.
Title 11 U.S.C. § 524(a)(2) provides that a bankruptcy discharge "operates as an injunction against the commencement or continuation of an action, the employment of process, or an act, to collect, recover or offset any such debt as a personal liability of the debtor, whether or not discharge of such debt is waived." Id. (emphasis added). Chapter 7 bankruptcy discharge does not, however, serve to discharge any debt or liability incurred in an official capacity. See Pelkoffer v. Deer, 144 B.R. 282, 286 (W.D. Pa. 1992). Therefore, liability may only be imposed, if at all, upon Ms. Locke in her official capacity.
Accordingly, it is ORDERED that Defendant Locke's Motion to Dismiss be, and it is hereby, GRANTED as to any and all claims asserted against her in her individual capacity and is otherwise DENIED.
It is FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff shall not continue to file any papers with the Court containing bodily fluids, including papers marked for identification with a bloody fingerprint. Such a practice exposes the staff of the Court to unacceptable health hazards. Any further repetition of this practice will result in dismissal of the above captioned action as a sanction.
It is FURTHER ORDERED that the stay in this case be, and it is hereby, LIFTED and the case should be placed on the next available trial calendar.