Moore v. Promise

Full title: TERRY A. MOORE, PLAINTIFF v. YOUTH PROMISE, ETAL., DEFENDANTS

Court: United States District Court, D. Maine

Date published: Oct 2, 2003

CIVIL No. 03-229-P-H (D. Me. Oct. 2, 2003)

Opinion

CIVIL No. 03-229-P-H

October 2, 2003

TERRY A MOORE, Plaintiff Represented By JEFFREY W. PETERS, PRETI, FLAHERTY, BELIVEAU, PACHIOS HALEY, LLC BATH, ME,

YOUTH PROMISE AND MARY TRESCOTT, Defendants Represented By NICOLE L. LORENZATTI, MOON, MOSS, MCGILL, HAYES SHAPIRO, P.A. PORTLAND, ME

ORDER

D. BROCK HORNBY, Chief Judge, District

The defendant Mary Trescott's motion to dismiss is GRANTED. On the federal claim, the plaintiff concedes that his claim is foreclosed in light of Gough v. Eastern Maine Development Corp., 172 F. Supp.2d221 (D. Me. 2001). On the state law claim, Maine's Law Court has withdrawn its decision in Gordon v. Cummings, 2000 WL 419716 (Me. April 19, 2000),withdrawn, 756 A.2d 942 (Me. 2000). I therefore conclude that Gough's conclusion that the federal treatment should also govern the state claim remains pertinent. See Miller v. Hall, 245 F. Supp.2d 191 (Me. 2003).

So Ordered.