Angell v. HALLEE
2012 ME 10
| Me. | 2012Background
- Angell alleges Hallee abused her as a child (circa 1970–1973) while he was a priest at St. John’s Parish in Bangor.
- Angell’s claims include negligence, sexual assault and battery, invasion of privacy, IIED, NIED, clergy malpractice, and breach of fiduciary duty, plus fraudulent concealment and punitive damages against Hallee and the Roman Catholic Bishop of Portland.
- Hallee admits current Massachusetts residence; Angell seeks tolling of the limitations period due to absence from Maine and out-of-state residency.
- Plaintiff filed suit March 25, 2010; the court granted judgment on the pleadings in favor of Hallee and Bishop; Bishop dismissed with prejudice during appellate proceedings.
- Angell argues tolling should apply during Hallee’s absence outside Maine; she seeks discovery to determine periods of absence and amenability to service.
- Judgment at issue is vacated and the matter remanded for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the tolling statute applies during defendant’s absence from Maine | Angell contends tolling applies when defendant is absent but amenable to service | Hallee argues no tolling if service is possible by nonpublication methods or if required conditions not shown | Tolling does not apply for periods plaintiff could serve by nonpublication means |
| Who bears the burden of proof on tolling after the defendant raises the limitation defense | Angell asserts burden on defendant to prove non-tolling | Hallee bears burden to prove he was in Maine or that Angell could locate and serve him | Defendant bears the burden to prove tolling defenses after raised; plaintiff must show prima facie tolling if defendant raises statute of limitations |
Key Cases Cited
- Patten v. Milam (Patten I), 468 A.2d 620 (Me. 1983) (initial tolling burden on defendant when absence raised)
- Patten v. Milam (Patten II), 480 A.2d 774 (Me. 1984) (burden remains on defendant to prove lack of tolling; absence and service considerations)
- Siegemund v. Shapland, 307 F. Supp. 2d 113 (D.Me. 2004) (tolling interpretation applicable when reasonable service methods exist other than publication)
- Baker v. Farrand, 26 A.3d 806 (Me. 2011) (de novo review of tolling statute interpretation)