Opinion
CV-20-85
03-25-2021
MAINE HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION (for the use of Angela Pitts) and ANGELA PITTS, individually and as next friend of minor child "Daughter," Plaintiffs v. JESSE WARREN, NICOLE POLICANO, ADAMA MACK, and BLUE WAGON, LLC, Defendants
MAINE HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION - PLAINTIFF ANGELA PITTS - PLAINTIFF Attorney for: ANGELA PITTS PATRICIA ENDER - RETAINED JESSE WARREN - DEFENDANT NICOLE POLICANO - DEFENDANT Attorney for: NICOLE POLICANO ADAM MACK - DEFENDANT ANDRE JAMES HUNGERFORD - RETAINED HUNGERFORD LEGAL BLUE WAGON LLC - DEFENDANT
KENNEBEC, SS
MAINE HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION - PLAINTIFF
ANGELA PITTS - PLAINTIFF Attorney for: ANGELA PITTS PATRICIA ENDER - RETAINED
JESSE WARREN - DEFENDANT
NICOLE POLICANO - DEFENDANT
Attorney for: NICOLE POLICANO
ADAM MACK - DEFENDANT ANDRE JAMES HUNGERFORD - RETAINED HUNGERFORD LEGAL
BLUE WAGON LLC - DEFENDANT
ORDER ON MOTIONS TO DISMISS (STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS)
WILLIAM R. STOKES JUSTICE, SUPERIOR COURT
Before the court are motions to dismiss on statute of limitations grounds, filed by Defendants Blue Wagon, LLC, Adam Mack and Nicole Policano. Specifically, Blue Wagon and Mack seek dismissal of Counts V, VI and VIII [sic] as to Angela Pitts on behalf of her minor Daughter (hereinafter referred to as Daughter). In an earlier Order dated December 29, 2020, Counts V, VI and VIII [sic] against Blue Wagon and Mack were dismissed, without objection, on the basis of the statute of limitations, as to Angela Pitts individually (hereinafter referred to as Pitts). Daughter has filed an opposition to the motion to dismiss submitted by Blue Wagon and Mack.
Count VIII appears to be mis-numbered as there is no Count VII in the complaint.
On January 8, 2021, Policano moved to dismiss Counts V, VI, IX and X against her on statute of limitations grounds as to both Pitts and Daughter.
It does not appear that Pitts, either individually or on behalf of Daughter, has submitted any opposition to Policano's motion. Accordingly, pursuant to M.R.Civ.P. 7(c)(3), any objections to Policano's motion are deemed waived and the motion will be granted.
Daughter does not appear to contest that, if the statute of limitations found in the Maine Human Rights Act (MHRA) is applicable here, her state law claims are barred. See 5M.R.S. §§ 4613 and 4622. Rather, Daughter contends that the statute of limitations applicable to her claims under the MHRA against Blue Wagon and Mack is that found in 14 M.R.S. § 752-C, which provides: "Actions based upon sexual acts toward minors may be commenced at any time."
The allegations in the complaint are that Pitts and Daughter lived in an apartment owned by Blue Wagon and managed by Mack. Policano and Defendant Jesse Warren, her boyfriend at the time, lived in the same building in an apartment downstairs from Pitts and Daughter. On September 13, 2017, Daughter babysat for Policano's child. When Policano and Warren returned later that evening, Warren sexually assaulted Daughter, who was 14 years of age at the time. Warren was later arrested, prosecuted and convicted of the sexual assault. He has been defaulted in this civil case.
It is alleged that a few days later, Policano informed Mack of the sexual assault. It is further alleged that following the sexual assault, Policano played loud music, called Pitts vulgar and racist names and complained about her without cause to Blue Wagon and Mack. In February, 2018, Pitts received a Notice to Quit from Blue Wagon and/or Mack. Pitts alleges that the reasons for the eviction notice were pretextual on the part of Blue Wagon and Mack and that their actions constituted housing discrimination on the basis of sex and race in violation of the MHRA and the federal Fair Housing Act (FHA).
There is no allegation that either Blue Wagon or Mack participated in, assisted, solicited or otherwise aided Warren in the sexual assault. Rather, Daughter alleges that Blue Wagon and Mack took no adverse housing actions against Pitts and Daughter until after learning of the sexual assault. Daughter contends, therefore, that her causes of action under the MHRA against Blue Wagon and Mack are "based upon sexual acts toward" her when she was a minor and may be commenced at any time.
The court cannot agree. The phrase "sexual acts toward minors" is expressly defined to mean a "sexual act" and "sexual contact," as defined in 17-A M.R.S. §§ 251(1)(C) & (D), "that are committed against or engaged in with a person under the age of twenty." 14 M.R.S. §§ 552-C(2)(A) & (B). In the court's view, the statute was intended to eliminate the state of limitations in civil cases where a defendant has "committed" or "engaged in" a sexual act or sexual contact against or with a minor. To expand the applicability of section 752-C to include the claims made here against Blue Wagon and Mack would stretch the language of the statute far beyond any reasonable reading.
CONCLUSION
The entry is:
Motion to Dismiss filed by Defendant Policano is GRANTED. Counts V, VI, IX and X of the complaint against Policano are DISMISSED as to Plaintiffs Angela Pitts in her individual capacity and on behalf of her minor Daughter.
Motion to Dismiss filed by Defendants Blue Wagon LLC and Adam Mack is GRANTED. Counts V, VI and VIII [sic] against Blue Wagon and Mack are DISMISSED as to Plaintiffs Angela Pitts on behalf of her minor Daughter. These same counts were previously dismissed as to Angela Pitts in her individual capacity.
The Clerk is directed to incorporate these orders into the docket of this civil case by notation reference in accordance with M.R.Civ.P. 79(a).