Picher v. Roman Catholic Bishop of Portland

ALEXANDER, J.,

with whom CLIFFORD, J., joins, dissenting.

[¶ 40] The Court’s opinion provides an extensively documented policy discussion of the history of charitable immunity. That discussion begins with the observation that we recognized charitable immunity “as an affirmative defense available to non-profit organizations to bar negligence claims.” (Emphasis added.) In fact, we *299have emphasized the importance of charitable immunity to protect charitable resources from “invasion of these funds to satisfy tort claims.” Coulombe v. Salvation Amy, 2002 ME 25, ¶ 10, 790 A.2d 593, 596 (emphasis…