Opinion
C.A. No. 07C-03-393-FSS.
May 8, 2007.
May 24, 2007.
Upon The State's Motion To Dismiss — GRANTED.
ORDER
Plaintiff, pro se, "as executrix and daughter of the Estate of Lilly Mae Brown," has sued a state agency, the Division of Long Term Residents Protection. Technically, Ross is the administrator, not the executor, of her mother's estate. According to the Complaint, which for present purposes is presumed true, Brown died tragically from injuries sustained in a nursing home. Allegedly, Brown was "dropped" while being given a bath. The Complaint, however, does not make allegations about Brown's death, nor does it ask for damages based on the death.
Instead, the Complaint alleges that in her "attempt to verify the State[']s report," Ross called "Mr. Francis Monaghan (the investigation section chief)." Ross asked to speak to Monaghan twice, but the receptionist and Monaghan, in effect, gave her the run around.
According to the Complaint, Monaghan says that he goes by the names Frank and Francis. The Complaint does not explain how any problem with Monaghan's name caused Ross or Brown any damage. The Complaint, itself, confirms that Ross spoke with Monaghan. What he said was allegedly constrained by privacy regulations, but he spoke with Ross. Nevertheless, the Complaint concludes, "I am therefore filing fraud or material misrepresentation of the State[']s report. I am therefore asking for 1,000,000.00."
Instead of filing an answer, the State moved for dismissal, and the court will decide the motion on the papers. There are separate reasons why this Complaint must be dismissed.
First, the Complaint names a state agency as defendant. The State has soverign immunity from fraud and ordinary negligence claims.
Del. Const. art. I, § 9; Doe v. Cates, 499 A.2d 1175, 1176-77 (Del. 1985).
Second, and most importantly, Plaintiff has failed to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. Under the circumstances presented in the Complaint, it makes no difference whether Francis Monaghan goes by the nickname Frank Monaghan, or vice versa. In other words, assuming everything alleged in the Complaint were true, Defendant has done nothing justifying a lawsuit, much less a damage award.
The court extends its sympathy to Reverend Ross on her mother's passing. And, the court regrets that her interaction with the Division was frustrating. Nevertheless, the Complaint does not make out a fraud claim, and for the foregoing reasons, the State's Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED .
IT IS SO ORDERED.