Fortin v. Titcomb, 747 F. Supp. 2d 44

Fortin sued Titcomb and Buttrick in federal court in Maine for excessive force; the jury returned a verdict awarding $125,000 on the negligence claim after reducing an initial $300,785 damages to reflect Fortin's own negligence.
Plaintiff moved to amend the judgment, or for relief from judgment, or for a new trial; defendants separately moved to alter or amend the judgment.
The magistrate judge denied Fortin's motion and granted the defendants’ motions, resulting in an amended judgment awarding $10,000 against each defendant.
The court addressed whether the Maine Tort Claims Act cap of $10,000 per occurrence (14 M.R.S.A. § 8104-D) applies and whether § 8116 insurance can alter or waive that cap.
The court concluded that the cap applies to both defendants and that insurance coverage does not waive or replace that limit; it also noted the plaintiff waived objections by not raising them before trial.
The court ultimately entered an amended judgment for $10,000 against each defendant.]
Issues:[{

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Damages vs. liability proportionality	Fortin argues damages reduction must proportionally reflect fault.	Titcomb/Buttrick contend reductions can be disproportionate under Maine law.	Disproportionate reductions permitted under Maine law.
Caps on damages under Maine Tort Claims Act	Insurance limits could affect or exceed the $10,000 cap.	Cap5 applies; insurance does not elevate or waive cap.	Damages capped at $10,000 per defendant.
Effect of § 8116 insurance on the cap	Insurance might override cap under § 8116.	Coverage does not waive cap; § 8116 not to negate 8104-D.	Insurance does not waive or supersede the cap.
Role of insurance policy attestation in motion to amend	Defendants must attach attested insurance documents to support motions.	Docs may be considered; late submissions may be treated as grounds for grant.	Lacking timely attested documents, motions still resolved on statutory cap.

Jackson v. Frederick's Motor Inn, 418 A.2d 168 (Me.1980) (discretion to reduce damages for comparative negligence not proportional to liability)
Pelletier v. Fort Kent Golf Club, 662 A.2d 220 (Me.1995) (jury may award damages disproportionate to liability under 14 M.R.S.A. § 156)
Doucette v. City of Lewiston, 697 A.2d 1292 (Me.1997) (limits of § 8104-D apply to municipal police damages)
Rippett v. Bemis, 672 A.2d 82 (Me.1996) (premises for insurance coverage not requiring ignoring policy exclusions under § 8104-D)
Moore v. City of Lewiston, 596 A.2d 612 (Me.1991) (insurance coverage issues under Maine tort claims act)
Rooney v. Sprague Energy Corp., 554 F.Supp.2d 39 (D.Me.2008) (waiver/objection principles in motion practice)