Case law

Cohen v. Hoye

280 A.2d 778 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Aug 19, 1971

Gordon v. … In Bergerman v.

Interstate Food Processing Corp. v. Town of Fort Fairfield

698 A.2d 1074 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Aug 18, 1997

Daniels v. … See, e.g., Givertz v.

Inhabitants of Porter v. Griswold

6 Me. 430 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · May 15, 1830

See also Brown v. Porter, 10 Mass. 93 ; Harrison v. Bridgton, 16 Mass. 16 ; 3 Dane’s Abr. ch. 76, art. 10, sec. 20. The law as to parsonage lands is familiar. … Weston v. Hunt, 2 Mass. 500 ; First Parish in Brunswick v. Dunlap, 7 Mass. 445 ; Brown v. Porter, before cited; Shapleigh v. Gilman, 13 Mass. 190 ; Austin v. Thomas; 14 Mass. 333 .

Hustus' Case

123 Me. 428 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Feb 12, 1924

Lough v. Acc. Comm., 104 Or., 313 , 207 Pac., 354 ; O’Esau v. Bliss Co., (N. Y.), 177 N. Y. S., 203; Cooke v. Holland Furnace Co., 200 Mich., 192 , 166 N. W., 1013 . … Hornbrook-Price Co. v. Stewart, (Ind.), 118 N. E., 315 . “The injury took place—when the rupture manifested itself and not—when he strained himself.” Brown’s Case, 228 Mass., 38 .

Chasson v. Sovereign Camp

127 Me. 151 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · May 14, 1928

In Brown v. … In Brown v.

Hartford Fire Insurance v. Stevens

123 Me. 368 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Jan 1, 1924

It follows logs sawed into boards and returns them to the owners. Wingate v. Smith, 20 Maine, 287. … Morrell v. Kimball, 1 Maine, 324; Hall v. Houghton, 37 Maine, 411; Brown v. Osgood, 25 Maine, 511; State v. Knight, 43 Maine, 135, citing Bradley v. Ricardo, 8 Bing., 220.

Livingstone v. A-R Cable Services of Maine

2000 Me. 18 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Feb 4, 2000

AFSCME Council 93 v. City of Portland, 675 A.2d 100, 102 (Me.1996); see also Maine Cent. R. Co. v. Bangor & Aroostook R.R. Co., 395 A.2d 1107, 1122 (Me.1978). … See Kuvaja v. Bethel Sav. Bank, 495 A.2d 804, n. 3 (Me.1985).

In Re Bangor Hydro-Electric Company

314 A.2d 800 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Jan 25, 1974

Roberts v. … Brown v. Gerald, 100 Me. 351 , 61 A. 785 (1905); Paine v. Savage, 126 Me. 121 , 136 A. 664 (1927). 5 .

Pleasant View Mobile Home Park, Inc. v. Town of Mechanic Falls

538 A.2d 273 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Mar 3, 1988

In reviewing this appeal to determine whether the decision of the Mechanic Falls Zoning Board of Appeals was unlawful, arbitrary, capricious or unreasonable, Marchi v. … Duryea v. Elkhorn Coal and Coke Corp., 123 Me. at 486 , 124 A. at 208 ; Doherty v. Russell, 116 Me. at 273 , 101 A. at 306-307 .

Morse v. Laverdiere's Super Drug Store

645 A.2d 613 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Aug 1, 1994

We affirm the decision of the Board in Morse and vacate the decision of the Appellate Division in Fee-ney. I. Morse v. … In Comeau v.

Lightfoot v. Matthews

587 A.2d 462 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Mar 5, 1991

See Caron v. Bangor Publishing Co., 470 A.2d 782, 784 (Me.1984); Restatement (Second) of Torts § 566, comment c (1977). Moreover, when read in context, the letter does not convey a defamatory message. See Bakal v. … I would be glad to discuss this matter with your board at your request.

Hoglund v. Aaskov Plumbing & Heating

895 A.2d 323 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Apr 26, 2006

Recently, the full Board unanimously ruled that mediation agreements are binding. Gross v. Hannaford Bros. Co., Dec. No. 95-01, WCB #93-009561 (Me.1995). … The Legislative History referred to in Bureau v.

Estate of Gregory Sullwold v. The Salvation Army

108 A.3d 1265 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Jan 22, 2015

See Toomey v. … See Hall v.

Green v. Commissioner of the Department of Mental Health, Mental Retardation & Substance Abuse Services

776 A.2d 612 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Jun 6, 2001

She argues that, pursuant to Pelkey v. … Co. v. Pub. Utils. Comm’n, 448 A.2d 272, 279 (Me.1982).

McLellan v. Hayford

72 Me. 410 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Jul 1, 1881

In support of the instructions, the plaintiff relies upon the cases of Aldrich v. Brown, 103 Mass. 527 ; Perry v. Lord, 111 Mass. 504 ; Pierce v. Parker, 121 Mass. 403 ; and Eggleston v. … Eggleston v. Boardman, simply affirms the doctrine declared in Aldrich v. Brown , with the additional remark that " retainers are uniformly' and universally charged, and may be recovered under the common counts.

State v. Giles

669 A.2d 192 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Jan 3, 1996

Mapp v. Ohio, 367 U.S. 643, 653-55 , 81 S.Ct. 1684, 1690-91 , 6 L.Ed.2d 1081 (1961). The resolution of this case is controlled by U.S. v. Villamonte-Marquez, 462 U.S. 579 , 103 S.Ct. 2573 , 77 L.Ed.2d 22 (1983). … Moreover, we have not adopted an exclusionary rule for illegal search and seizure beyond that mandated by Mapp v. Ohio. See e.g. State v. Tarantino, 587 A.2d 1095, 1098 (Me.1991).

York Golf and Tennis Club v. Tudor Ins. Co.

845 A.2d 1173 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Apr 9, 2004

Francis Reilly and Dana Foster were elected to the board, but the club held a recount, which resulted in the removal of Reilly and Foster from the board of directors. … Corp. v. Cont'l Ins. Co., No. 93-15326, 1994 U.S.App. LEXIS 35911, at **9, 15-17 (9th Cir.

Beaulieu v. Dirigo Housing Associates

648 A.2d 968 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Oct 21, 1994

Soule v. StiNSon Canning Co., 537 A.2d 1152 , 1153 n. 2 (Me.1988). … See Soule, 537 A.2d at 1152 ; Wood v. Cives Constr. Corp., 438 A.2d 905, 909 (Me.1981); Mathews v. R.T. Allen & Sons, 266 A.2d 240, 243 (Me.1970).

Pitcher v. Town of Wayne

599 A.2d 1155 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Dec 17, 1991

(Board) of the Town of Wayne (Town). … When the Superior Court acts in an intermediate appellate capacity, we independently examine the record developed before a zoning board of appeals and review the board’s decision “only to determine whether the [bjoard abused

Inhabitants of Veazie v. Mayo

45 Me. 560 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Jul 1, 1858

Pond v. Negus, 3 Mass. 232 : The People v. Peck, 11 Wend. 604 : Hooker v. Young, 5 Cow. 269 . … Its action may be entirely different from that of the board of aldermen; the common council being much larger, numerically, than the board of aldermen, would have the absolute control when acting with that body in the capacity