Merrill v. Blanchard

STATE OF MAINE SUPERIOR COURT
PENOBSCOT, SS. CIVIL ACTION
DOCKET NO CV-18-0256

LAWRENCE MERRILL,

Plaintiff,
v. ORDER
MAURICE BLANCHARD,

Defendant.

Hearing was held on the plaintiff's complaint on September 26, 2019. The

plaintiff, an attorney, was present and represented himself while the defendant was

present and represented by counsel, Daniel Bernier, Esq.

In his complaint, plaintiff seeks to recover pursuant to a loan agreement and

three addenda. He also seeks to recover on a $4,000 promissory note. Merrill loaned

these sums to Blanchard so that he could purchase a race car, buy other cars for resale,

and for other purposes. Blanchard has made some payments on the loans but Merrill

asserts that he is now in default and owes over $17,000 on the agreements and over

$4,000 on the note . Blanchard has counterclaimed, alleging unjust enrichment,

quantum meruit, and breach of contract.

Mr. Merrill has had a complex financial relationship with Mr. Blanchard and his

wife Heidi for many years. In addition to the loans already mentioned, Mr. Merrill

financed Heidi Blanchard' purchase of real estate which has now been sold. Each parcel

appreciated during Ms. Blanchard's period of ownership and Mr. Merrill assisted in the

sale, but kept any proceeds that exceeded the amount due and provided no accounting

for the sums retained. Additionally, while residing in these properties, Mr. Blanchard

made improvements and maintained the properties with his own labor. He also

provided services for Mr. Merrill such as cutting wood and repairing vehicles without
compensation, but under the belief that his indebtedness to Mr. Merrill was being

reduced.
Throughout this complex financial interaction, Mr. Merrill did not provide the

Blanchards with statements or accounting information. The Blanchards did not

complain at the time because the parties were friendly and Mr. Merrill was assisting

them financially. Over time, the relationship soured and Mr. Merrill demanded

payment according to an accounting he produced and the Blanchards objected,

claiming that they had paid off the debt through payments, the sale of real estate, and

their labor.
On December 26, 2017, Merrill sent Blanchard a letter stating, "As I mentioned

on the phone, I've decided to forget about the debt for the race car, cars you were going

to resell, and whatever else. But I might as well get something out of it." Hoping to gain

income tax benefit, he then enclosed a document to be signed by Blanchard that

acknowledged the debt, indicated he would never have the money to pay it, and

proclaimed that he would not pay. Blanchard refused to sign and eventually Merrill

filed suit.

The Court finds that Mr. Merrill has failed to prove that any sum is due. There is

evidence of repayment with money, labor, and real estate sale proceeds. Discerning the

impact of these incremental attempts at repayment has been made difficult because of

Mr. Merrill's failure to provide the debtors with periodic statements. Mr. Merrill's

expression in this letter that he had decided to "forget about the debt," however, carries

with it the implication that, at the time, he considered the debt paid.
Concerning the counterclaims, they are denied because, in essence, there is now

no unjust enrichment, the subject of Count I, and Mr. Blanchard is being compensated

for his services, the subject of Counts II and III.

The Entry Is:

Judgment for the Defendant on the Complaint

Judgment for the Counterclaim Defendant on the Counterclaims

Dated: October 2. 2019
LLIAM ANDERSON
JUSTICE, SUPERIOR COURT