Erlich v. OUELLETTE, LABONTE, ROBERGE AND ALLEN
637 F.3d 32
1st Cir.2011Background
- Fund, arising from a 2006 merger, sought damages for miscalculations in predecessor funds' pension payments.
- Auditor (Ouellette) tested pensions and found errors; actuary (Thomas) calculated pensions incorrectly.
- Fund discovered overpayments totaling over $3.5 million after reviewing predecessor calculations (1973–2005).
- Two suits filed in 2009 in Maine federal court asserting contract, negligence, and professional malpractice claims.
- District court dismissed pre-2003 claims as untimely under Maine six-year statute of limitations, ruling accrual at injury.
- Parties agreed that the Ouellette case’s timeliness ruling applied to Thomas; judgment entered for both.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Does Maine’s accrual rule apply discovery-based tolling for auditors/actuaries? | Fund argues discovery rule should apply to fiduciary-like roles of auditors/actuaries. | Ouellette/Thomas contend accrual is date of injury; no discovery rule for non-fiduciaries. | Discovery rule not applied; accrual at injury. |
| Is there a confidential or fiduciary relationship warranting discovery-rule extension? | Fund asserts confidential relationship/fiduciary status akin to Nevin. | No fiduciary or confidential relationship; arm’s-length professional services. | No such relationship; discovery rule not extended. |
| Should Maine have adopted a discovery rule for non-fiduciary professionals under § 752? | Maine law should recognize discovery-based accrual for professionals with expertise. | Maine generally maintains date-of-injury accrual; departures are rare. | Declines adoption; adheres to date-of-injury accrual under Maine law. |
Key Cases Cited
- McLaughlin v. Superintending Sch. Comm. of Lincolnville, 832 A.2d 782 (Me. 2003) (accrual generally at injury; discovery not required)
- Johnston v. Dow & Coulombe Inc., 686 A.2d 1064 (Me. 1996) (accrual doctrine defined)
- Anderson v. Neal, 428 A.2d 1189 (Me.1981) (discovery rule in attorney malpractice)
- Myrick v. James, 444 A.2d 987 (Me.1982) (discovery rule in medical malpractice context)
- Nevin v. Union Trust Company, 726 A.2d 694 (Me.1999) (fiduciary context may support discovery rule)
- Bolton v. Caine, 541 A.2d 924 (Me.1988) (abrogated or limited in later years; discovery rule not broad)
- Ruebsamen v. Maddocks, 340 A.2d 31 (Me.1975) (concept of confidential relationship discussed)
- Gendreau, 750 A.2d 591 (Me.2000) (date-of-injury accrual governs most actions)
- Stewart v. Machias Sav. Bank, 762 A.2d 44 (Me.2000) (standing alone creditor-debtor not confidential)
- Reid v. Key Bank of S. Me., Inc., 821 F.2d 9 (1st Cir.1987) (bank/customer relationship not confidential under Maine law)