Case law

State of Maine v. James A. Green

2024 ME 44 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · May 30, 2024

Green argued that the DRE could not be qualified as an expert under Maine Rule of Evidence 702. … The DRE thus testified as an expert in everything but name. [¶18] “A pretrial objection to . . . evidence must be timely renewed at trial unless the court states on the record, or the context clearly demonstrates

Opinion of the Justices

394 A.2d 1168 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Dec 11, 1978

give advisory opinions is usually described not by general definition encompassing all possible exigencies, but by the negative process of listing those situations that do not constitute a “solemn occasion.” *1171 It is clearly … established through numerous precedents that the Justices have no power to render advisory opinions on a matter which is not of “live gravity.”

Jones v. Jones

18 Me. 308 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Jun 15, 1841

Gilman, who married these parties, held that office, and also that of justice of the peace for the county, and was duly qualified. … The language of the act and the design of the legislature in passing it clearly indicate the intention, that there should be no appeal from a decision of the Judge upon a question of fact.

Bank of American, N.A. v. Scott A. Greenleaf

96 A.3d 700 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Jul 3, 2014

Given this overlap in source, we have not always clearly distinguished between issues of standing and issues of proof. … Id. [¶19] In this matter, the Bank failed to establish two of the eight foreclosure elements.

State v. Doherty

60 Me. 504 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Jul 1, 1872

, in accordance with some preexisting law, and a trial by a court of justice, according to the regular and established course of judicial proceedings. … It is clearly within the class of subjects, inhibited by the national and State constitutions, as topics of legislation, and is included in the provision against passing any law to deprive any person of life, liberty, or

Adoption by Kathleen C.

2026 ME 14 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Feb 19, 2026

Petitioners appealed the judgments and we affirmed, concluding that “the court did not clearly err or abuse its discretion in finding that adoption by the other party petitioning for adoption is in the child’s best interest … Although these facts may have some probative value with respect to a Rule 60(b)(3) motion, for purposes of Rule 60(b)(2) they do not qualify as “newly discovered evidence.”

InfoBridge, LLC v. Chimani, Inc.

228 A.3d 721 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Apr 2, 2020

To invoke the doctrine of equitable estoppel in order to avoid the enforcement of a contract, a party must establish that he or she reasonably 1The court previously denied Chimani’s motion to amend its answer to add … parties advance various grammatical rules and canons of construction to support their respective interpretations, but these explanatory aids can shed only so much light on a sentence this jam-packed with modifying and qualifying

Pitcher v. Town of Wayne

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

In contrast, the minimum setback and maximum height standards established by Article V(C) apply to all new structures in the shoreland zone. … The Shoreland Zone shall be a zone of year-round and seasonal residence, and certain qualifying uses. B. Minimum Lot Size and Density: 1.

D'Amato v. S.D. Warren Co.

832 A.2d 794 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Sep 19, 2003

Here, the Board clearly expressed its “pleasure” when it appointed Hearing Officer Johnson and established that her term should expire no later than December 31, 2002. … In this case, the issue of Hearing Officer Johnson's authority was clearly raised by the parties.

Bates v. Schillinger

128 Me. 14 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Mar 11, 1929

Beneficiaries is there used with two meanings, one for the qualifying word “indefinite,” another for the qualifying words “capable of being ascertained.” … The will taken as a whole indicates clearly an intent to provide bequests for the benefit of the various donees only.

Poulin v. Bilodeau

161 Me. 306 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Jul 8, 1965

Wadlin toas qualified to testify as an expert.” Dr. … The decision is conclusive unless it clearly appears that the evidence was not justified, or that it was based upon some error in law-----” Hunter v. Totman, 146 Me. 259, 268 . 3. Whether or not Dr.

State v. Smith

379 A.2d 722 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Nov 4, 1977

This court will reverse that ruling only if it is clearly erroneous. State v. McLain, Me., 367 A.2d 213 (1976); State v. Walker, Me., 341 A.2d 700 (1975). … Section 393 now expressly provides that the code definition of “firearm” qualifies the offense of possession of a firearm by a felon.

State v. Twin Village Water Co.

98 Me. 214 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Dec 8, 1903

The burden of proof rests upon the State to establish its allegations. There is no evidence of any usurpation by the corporation. … These are measured by the business actually done, or what could be clearly shown would be done, if increased facilitiés were .granted.”

State v. St. Pierre

584 A.2d 618 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Dec 19, 1990

Pierre further contends that even if MacLean and Jacobsohn were qualified to give expert testimony, it was for the jury to decide whether St. … The savagery of this killing is unquestioned, but the evidence clearly points to the fact that St.

Robbins v. Great Northern Paper Co.

557 A.2d 614 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Apr 13, 1989

Our decision was based solely on the well-established rule that statutes must be construed in connection with all pertinent statutes in order to reach the harmonious result intended by the legislature. Noel v. … Clearly that payment was both a benefit to Great Northern [2] and a detriment to Robbins within the common and ordinary meaning of those words as used in the definition of "consideration." See Kennebunk Sav. Bank v.

Richard G. Tappen v. Clark T. Hill

2026 ME 1 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Jan 13, 2026

The Plan’s road network is clearly designed to provide all residents with access to the beach. … a boundary line, the party asserting a specific location of such a line bears the burden of presenting credible evidence to establish that location.”

Searles v. Ross

134 Me. 77 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Oct 15, 1935

The negligence of Victor Weed, who was clearly the employee and agent of the defendants, is in dispute. … Warren Searles was doing that which he was told to do by a much older boy, whom the defendant thought qualified to operate a mowing machine.

Hills v. Gardiner Savings Institution

309 A.2d 877 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Oct 3, 1973

The N.I.L. clearly indicates the requirements for creating an effective endorsement of a negotiable instrument such as the note in question. … The writing itself says that the Plaintiff “qualifies and restricts his contingent liability as an endorser upon said promissory note . . . .”

Percy v. Allen

449 A.2d 337 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Aug 13, 1982

Oliver further testified that he considered the plaintiff to so qualify. Oliver described the training program in use for new guards in 1977 as a “shadow program.” … A comparison of the Maine and federal formulations of the BFOQ defense, see notes 6 and 7 supra, reveals that the BFOQ exception set forth in the state statute “is *343 not as clearly stated as the federal exception.”

State v. Rippy

626 A.2d 334 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · May 28, 1993

. ****** For the limited purpose [of determining] whether or not she qualifies as a witness at this stage, I’m going to rule she qualifies. … Rippy, therefore, failed to establish that he was prejudiced by the prein-dictment delay.