Opinion
PENSC-CIV-2022-00086
08-14-2023
Amarylis Fisher, Plaintiff v. City of Bangor, Community Connector, et. al., Defendants.
ORDER ON MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT
THE HON. BRUCE C. MALLONEE JUSTICE
Pending before the court is a motion for summary judgment filed by Defendants City of Bangor and Community Connector. The contested elements of the motion, as developed first in written memoranda and supporting materials from the parties and then amplified at oral argument, concern the effect on Plaintiff s claim of the Maine Tort Claims Act, 14 M.R.S. §§ 8101 et. seq. Much of the parties' memoranda and oral arguments addressed the quality of the factual assertions on which the other party relied. Summary judgment may be granted only if the materials submitted show there is no genuine issue of material fact and a party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Rule 56 (c) M.R.Civ.P. In response to this standard, the parties contest whether the competing affidavits comport with Rule 56 (e) M.R.Civ.P., which requires that "[s]upporting and opposing affidavits shall be made on personal knowledge, shall set forth such facts as would be admissible in evidence, and shall show affirmatively that the affiant is competent to testify to the matters stated therein."
The parties' submissions persuade the court that material facts remain unresolved. Without attempting an exhaustive list, the court notes in particular two questions: whether the City has established a de facto Public Transit District pursuant to 30-A M.R.S. § 3505 (2); and whether the bus service operates in interstate commerce. The assertions on summary judgment with respect to these issues were more conclusory than factually supported, and the court can imagine differing factual predicates that might lead to divergent legal conclusions.
Because there are unresolved issues of material fact, the motion for partial summary judgment must be DENIED.
The Clerk may incorporate this Order upon the docket by reference.