I. FACTS AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND [¶ 2] For purposes of evaluating a motion to dismiss, we accept the facts alleged in the complaint as true. Halco v. Davey, 2007 ME 48, ¶ 6, 919 A.2d 626, 629. [¶ 3] Maine Energy Recovery owns and operates a solid waste incinerator in Biddeford.
"Black's Law Dictionary 210 (2nd Pocket Edition, 2001). The Rhode Island Supreme Court has not yet defined the term "disparage," but in Halco v. Davey, 919 A.2d 626 (Me. 2007), the Supreme Judicial Court of Maine addressed the issue. In Halco, the court held that the plain and ordinary meaning of the words "disparage or discredit" require a specific attack on one's reputation or credibility.
Under Maine law, at the motion to dismiss stage a court must first determine if the provision at issue is ambiguous or not. Halco v. Davey, 919 A.2d 626, 629 (Me. 2007). If the provision is not ambiguous, the question of its meaning is a matter of law and may be decided by the court.
The Maine Supreme Judicial Court upheld the dismissal. Halco v. Davey, 919 A.2d 626, 630–31 (Me.2007). Because the Plaintiffs' false light claim is based on statements which are not defamatory under Maine law, the Plaintiffs' false light claim must be dismissed.
[¶ 47] There are certainly situations in which the granting of a motion to dismiss a defamation claim is warranted, notwithstanding the highly deferential standard of review afforded to plaintiffs on such a motion. SeeHalco v. Davey , 2007 ME 48, ¶¶ 4, 14, 919 A.2d 626 (affirming the dismissal of a defamation claim under M.R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6), where the alleged defamatory statements were merely statements of opinion). However, it would take far more unsupported speculation and vagueness than is present in the pleadings of this case to appropriately dismiss a defamation complaint for a lack of specificity in the alleged defamatory statements.
"Dismissal is warranted only when it appears beyond a doubt that the plaintiff is not entitled to relief under any set of facts that might be proved in support of the claim." Halco v. Davey, 2007 ME 48, ¶ 6, 919 A.2d 626 (quotation marks omitted).
Id., "Dismissal is warranted only when it appear s beyond a doubt that the plaintiff is not entitled to relief under any set of facts that might be proved in support of the claim." Halco v. Davey, 2007 ME 48, ¶ 6, 919 A.2d 626 (quotation marks omitted).
"Dismissal is warranted only when it appeal's beyond a doubt that the plaintiff is not entitled to relief under any set of facts that might be proved in support of the claim." Halco v. Davey, 2007 ME 48, ¶ 6, 919 A.2d 626 (quotation marks omitted).
.Davey, 2007 ME 48,¶ 6,919 A.2d 626 (quotation marks omitted).
Id. "Dismissal is warranted only when it appears beyond a doubt that the plaintiff is not entitled to relief under any set of facts that might be proved in support of the claim." Halco v. Davey, 2007 ME 48, ¶ 6, 919 A.2d 626 (quotation marks omitted).