Opinion
CV-21-39
06-14-2022
ASHLEE MADORE, Plaintiff v. DAVID MADORE, Defendant
DECISION AND ORDER
Defendant David Madore moves for summary judgment on plaintiff Ashlee Madore's claim for wrongful death of the parties' nine-year-old son, Brayden. For the following reasons, the motion will be granted.
Background
The following facts are drawn from defendant's properly supported statements of material fact. Pursuant to Rule 56(h)(4), statements of material fact that are not properly controverted are deemed admitted for the purposes of summary judgment. To properly qualify or deny an adverse party's statement of fact that is supported by admissible record evidence, a party must also cite to record evidence that would be admissible at trial. M.R. Civ. P. 56(e), (h)(2); see also Stanley v. Hancock County Comm'rs, 2004 ME 157, ¶ 19, 864 A.2d 169 ("A cornerstone of the rationale for having a summary judgment process is that a trial is not warranted if a party cannot identify admissible evidence that establishes an actual factual dispute.") As Ms. Madore did not support her denials of Mr. Madore's statements of material fact with citations to any record evidence that would be admissible at trial, they are deemed admitted.
The court is sympathetic to Ms. Madore's difficulties as a pro se plaintiff. However, the Law Court has held numerous times that pro se litigants are held to the same standards as represented parties and must comply with the Maine Rules of Civil Procedure. See, e.g.. Dyer Goodall and Federle v. Proctor, 2007 ME 145, ¶ 18, 935 A.2d 1123.
Brayden Madore was the son of Ms. Madore and Mr. Madore. (Supp.'g S.M.F. ¶ 1.) Brayden died on April 16, 2019, while at Mr. Madore's home in Greene, Maine. (Id. ¶¶ 2-3.)
The only people at home at the time of Brayden's death were his father, Mr. Madore; his two older sisters, both of whom were minors; and Mr. Madore's fiance's two minor daughters. (Id. ¶ 4.) Brayden had spent most of the afternoon of April 16 alone in his bedroom, behind a closed door, playing a computer game. (Id. ¶ 6.) Mr, Madore went into the bedroom to ask Brayden to join him and the girls in the living room, where they planned to watch a movie. (Id. ¶ 9.)
Mr. Madore found Brayden with a blanket wrapped around his neck, facing the window, with his feet touching the floor. (Id. ¶ 10.) The blanket appeared to be hanging from the top bunk of Brayden's bed. (Id.) When Mr. Madore went to move the blanket, Brayden's body fell out of it. (Id. ¶ 12.) Mr. Madore moved Brayden to the living room and performed CPR, then called 911. (Id. ¶¶ 13-14.) Mr. Madore performed CPR on Brayden until medical personnel arrived. (Id. ¶ 15.)
Following an investigation into the cause of Brayden's death, the State Chief Medical Examiner Mark Flomenbaum, M.D., Ph.D. concluded that Brayden's death was an accident that resulted from a partial suspension hanging that occurred when Brayden became entrapped in clothing and bedding material after falling from the upper bunk bed in his bedroom. (Id. ¶ 17.) The Chief Medical examiner did not determine the exact time of death and indicated only that Brayden was found deceased at 6:08 PM on April 19, 2019. (Id. ¶ 19.)
Brayden's estate has not been probated and no personal representative or special administrator had been appointed to represent his estate. (Id. ¶ 23.)
Standard
Summary judgment is granted to a moving party where "there is no genuine issue as to any material fact" and the moving party "is entitled to judgment as a matter of law." M.R. Civ. P. 56(c). "A material fact is one that can affect the outcome of the case, and there is a genuine issue when there is sufficient evidence for a fact-finder to choose between competing versions of the fact." Lougee Conservancy v. City Mortgage, Inc., 2012 ME 103, ¶ 11,48 A.3d 774 (quotation omitted).
Discussion
Mr. Madore has moved for summary judgment on two grounds. First, Mr. Madore argues that Ms. Madore does not have standing to pursue a wrongful death action on Brayden's behalf. Second, Mr. Madore argues that even if Ms. Madore does have standing, she has not produced any evidence of a causal connection between Mr. Madore's alleged negligence and Brayden's death.
A wrongful death action is a creature of statute, provided for by 18-C M.R.S. § 2-807 (2021). § 2-807 provides, in the relevant part, that "[e]very wrongful death action must be brought by and in the name of the personal representative or special administrator of the deceased person.. .." Ms. Madore is not the personal representative or special administrator of Brayden's estate. Therefore, Ms. Madore does not have legal standing under the statute to bring this claim on Brayden's behalf. Flaherty v. Allstate Ins. Co., 2003 ME 72, ¶ 14, 822 A.2d 1159.
Standing "is a condition of justiciability that a plaintiff must satisfy in order to invoke the court's subject matter jurisdiction." Bank of Am., N.A. v. Greenleaf, 2015 ME 127, ¶ 8, 124 A.3d 1122. Lack of standing renders a complaint nonjusticiable, "-i.e., incapable of judicial resolution." Id. For that reason, the court cannot reach the merits of the complaint.
The entry is Defendant David Madore's motion for summary judgment is GRANTED.
The Clerk is directed to enter this order into the docket by reference pursuant to M.R.Civ.P. 79(a).