Case law

Sanger v. County Commissioners of Kennebec

25 Me. 291 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Jun 15, 1845

be annulled by one of the boards acting separately. … Rex v. Merchant Factor’s Co. 2 B. & Ald. 115. These authorities, which are believed to be in accordance with others upon the same subject, contain the general rule of the common law upon this point.

Churchill v. S. A. D. 49 Teachers Ass'n

380 A.2d 186 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Nov 18, 1977

Brennan v. R. D. … We conclude that the Board was an aggrieved party within the meaning of Rule 72(c), M.R.C.P. See Blaney v. Rittall, 1973, Me., 312 A.2d 522 .

Hoyt v. Byrnes

11 Me. 475 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Jun 15, 1834

See also, Hubbard v. Chinny, 8 Cowan, 88; Briggs v. Calverly, 8 T. R. 129. … R. 554; Brown v. Saul, 4 Esp. R. 267; Lockyer v. Jones, Peake 180 ; Roscoe Ev. 263; Brown v. Dysinger, 1 Jacob 408.

Jade Realty Corp. v. Town of Eliot

946 A.2d 408 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · May 8, 2008

Gensheimer v. Town of Phippsburg, 2007 ME 85, ¶ 8 , 926 A.2d 1168, 1170 ; Marion v. Town of Ogunquit, 2000 ME 166, ¶ 6 , 759 A.2d 704, 706 . … Bodack v. Town of Ogunquit, 2006 ME 127, ¶ 12 , 909 A.2d 620, 624 (quoting Kimball v.

Prince v. Skillin

71 Me. 361 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Aug 10, 1880

Farwell v. Rockland, 62 Maine, 298; Butler v. Pennsylvania, 10 How. (U. S.) 403; Parker v. Pittsburgh, 4 Barr. 51; Connor v. New York, 1 Sodden, 291; Taft v. Adams, 3 Gray, 126 . … People v. Cook, 8 N. Y. 67 ; People v. Vail, 20 Wend. 12 ; State v. Governor, 1 Dutch. 348; People v. Judson, 55 N. Y. 525 .

Bakala v. Town of Stonington

647 A.2d 85 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · May 25, 1994

On appeal from a judicial review of action taken by a zoning board, we review the record before the board directly for abuse of discretion, errors of law, or findings unsupported by substantial evidence. Boisvert v. … We need not address that contention, because it comes too late; the record reveals that he did not raise that issue before the board. See Morris v.

Inhabitants of Richmond v. Toothaker

69 Me. 451 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · May 19, 1879

Brown, 67 Maine, 373. … Richmond v. Brown, 66 Maine, 373.

Hyler v. Town of Blue Hill

570 A.2d 316 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Feb 22, 1990

In Vachon v. Town of Kennebunk, 499 A.2d 140 (Me.1985), we dealt with language (governing zoning boards of appeal) that required a “decision” to be “rendered.” … See Torrey v. Full Gospel Church of Searsport, 394 A.2d 276, 278-79 (Me.1978) (court’s notation that a motion is granted does not amount to an order).

Hollenberg v. Town of Union

918 A.2d 1214 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Mar 29, 2007

Hollenberg appealed the Planning Board’s decision to the Town’s Zoning Board of Appeals, which upheld the Planning Board’s decision by a 4-2 vote. Hollen-berg then appealed pursuant to M.R. Civ. … York Ins. of Me., Inc. v. Superintendent of Ins., 2004 ME 45, ¶ 13 , 845 A.2d 1155, 1159 . We review interpretations of zoning ordinances de novo. Kittery Retail Ventures, LLC v.

Bartley v. Eastern Maine Medical Center

617 A.2d 1020 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Dec 14, 1992

Bhatnagar v. Mid-Maine Medical Ctr., 510 A.2d 233, 234 (Me.1986). … Viewed as a whole, however, as a contract must be construed, Boisvert v. Trustee of GHR Trust, 605 A.2d 939, 941 (Me.1992); Benedix v. Boston Old Colony Ins.

Town of Old Orchard Beach v. Old Orchard Beach Police Patrolmen's Ass'n

461 A.2d 1054 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Jun 28, 1983

See Sanford Highway Unit of Local 481 v. Town of Sanford, 411 A.2d 1010, 1012-13 (Me.1980). . The Board itself has apparently construed "effective date" to mean date of receipt by a party's counsel. … Stewart v. Inhabitants of Town of Durham, 451 A.2d 308, 310 (Me.1982); State v. York Utilities Co., 142 Me. 40, 44 , 45 A.2d 634, 635-36 (1948). .

Doucette v. Hallsmith/Sysco Food Services, Inc.

10 A.3d 692 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Dec 23, 2010

Servs. v. Workers’ Comp. Bd., 678 A.2d 578, 583 (Me.1996) (quotation marks omitted); Jordan v. Sears, Roebuck & Co., 651 A.2d 358, 362 (Me.1994). … Cos. v. Murray, 420 A.2d 251, 252 (Me.1980) (holding lack of a provision for repayment of benefits after employer’s successful appeal is a question to be addressed by the Legislature); Ryerson v.

Lucarelli v. City of South Portland

719 A.2d 534 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Nov 2, 1998

Brooks v. Town of North Berwick, 1998 ME 146, ¶ 8 , 712 A.2d 1050, 1053 . One does not participate in a hearing by expressing opposition to an application prior to the hearing, see Jaeger v. … Protection v. Town of Otis, 1998 ME 214, ¶8 , 716 A.2d 1023, 1025 (holding that written comments by the DEP to a Planning Board at a preliminary phase of an application for a permit did not constitute participation).

Halfway House, Inc. v. City of Portland

670 A.2d 1377 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Feb 5, 1996

Good Will Home Ass’n v. Erwin, 285 A.2d 874 (Me.1971). Thus, Pha-ros House’s challenge to the Planning Board’s decisions, if nonjustieiable, is nonjus-ticiable for reasons of mootness, not standing. … In Walsh v. City of Brewer, 315 A.2d 200 (Me.1974), and again in Tisei v.

Sahl v. Town of York

760 A.2d 266 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Oct 24, 2000

See Brooks v. … See Thomas v.

Your Home, Inc. v. City of Portland

501 A.2d 1300 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Dec 19, 1985

In these circumstances, we review the record directly as developed before the Board and would grant no deference to the Superior Court’s decision had it reached the merits. See Your Home, Inc. v. … See Warren v. Municipal Officers of Gorham, 431 A.2d at 627-30 . The entry is: Judgment denying the plaintiffs’ appeal vacated. Judgment affirming the decision of the Portland Zoning Board of Appeals affirmed.

Elsemore v. Inhabitants of Hancock

137 Me. 243 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Mar 4, 1941

That the same principle is applicable to contracts involving personal services was recognized by this court in Dickey v. … In Abrams v. Board of Education, 230 Ky., 151 , 18 S.

Campbell v. Burns

94 Me. 127 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · May 11, 1900

V. … Brown, 25 N. H. (5 Foster) 114; Bradish v. Bliss, 35 Vt. 326 ; Weston v. Gravlin, 49 Vt. 507 ; People v. Briggs, 114 N. Y. 64 ; Allen v. Allen, 101 Id. 658; Jones v. Greaves, 26 Ohio, 2; Watkins v.

Bassett v. Bassett

55 Me. 127 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Jul 1, 1867

Goodspeed v. Fuller, 46 Maine, 141. 2. … King v. Brown, 2 Hill, 485 ; Brown on Stat. of Frauds, § 118. 3. There is no rule of law prohibiting the alteration of a deed by the parties to it.

Scola v. Town of Sanford

695 A.2d 1194 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · May 29, 1997

As we recently concluded in Cook v. … Cook v. Lisbon School Comm., 682 A.2d at 680 . The entry is: Judgments affirmed. 1 .