Case law

Cole v. Fickett

95 Me. 265 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Apr 19, 1901

Andrews v. Andrews, 81 Maine, 339; Cross v. Bean, 81 Maine, 529. As this suit is not between the parties to the deed to Fred E. … Pomeroy’s Equity, § 981; De Riemer v. De Cantillon, 4 Johns. Ch. 90 ; Perry on Trusts, § 186; Gillespie v. Moon, 2 Johns. Ch. 585 ; Brown v. Lamphear, 35 Vt. 252 ; Loss v. Obrey, 7 C. E. Green, 52; Farley v.

Ludington v. LaFreniere

704 A.2d 875 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Jan 22, 1998

McIntyre v. Plummer, 375 A.2d 1083, 1084 (Me.1977); see also Brown & Sons v. Boston & Maine R.R. … Biette v.

State v. Canadian Pacific Railway Co.

125 Me. 350 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Jul 8, 1926

Lane v. Railway Co., (Iowa), 180 N. W., 899 . The cases cited in the briefs are not precisely in point, nor are they claimed so to be by counsel. Ingersoll v. Railway Co., 157 N. … The appellant owning a station and other structures in Quincy was taxed by the local assessors and also by the State Board. It was hable to be taxed by one, not by both.

Liberty Insurance Underwriters, Inc. v. Estate of Faulkner

957 A.2d 94 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Oct 7, 2008

We must determine whether our acceptance “ “would be consistent with our basic function as an appellate court,’ ” or would improperly place us “ ‘in the role of an advisory board.’ ” Id. § 24.2 at 172 (quoting Morris v. … See Butler v. Mooers, 2001 ME 56, ¶ 7 , 771 A.2d 1034, 1037 ; Thermos Co. v.

David A. Jones v. Secretary of State

239 A.3d 628 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Oct 1, 2020

See Buckley v. Am. Const. L. Found., Inc., 525 U.S. 182, 186-87, 192-97 (1999); McIntyre v. Ohio Elections Comm’n, 514 U.S. 334, 344-45 (1995); Burdick v. Takushi, 504 U.S. 428, 433-34 (1992); Anderson v. … Brown, 415 U.S. 724, 730 (1974). [¶8] As to Jones’s argument that an affidavit alone would be sufficient to establish residency, we reiterate the significance of simple and timely verification of residency.

State v. Ryder

348 A.2d 1 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Nov 14, 1975

State v. Huff, 157 Me. 269, 275 , 171 A.2d 210, 213 (1961); State v. McNaughton, 132 Me. 8, 11 , 164 A. 623, 625 (1933). … State v. Armstrong, Me., 344 A.2d 42, 49 (1975); State v. Palumbo, Me., 327 A.2d 613, 616 (1974).

Inhabitants of Cumberland Co. v. Pennell

69 Me. 357 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Apr 21, 1879

Browning v. Hanford, 5 Hill (N. Y.), 588. S. C. in error, 5 Denio, 586 , and cases cited in the chancellor’s opinion. Moore v. Westervelt, 21 N. Y. 103 . Phillips v. Lamar, 27 Ga. 228 . … S. v. Thomas, 15 Wall. 354. To a similar purport, see opinion of Cowen, J., in Browning v. Hanford, 5 Hill (N. Y.), 591.

State v. DeGennaro

46 A.3d 1147 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · May 24, 2012

State v. McLaughlin, 2009 ME 90, ¶ 8 , 977 A.2d 1008 ; see State v. … About a week after the project was approved by the planning board they received a call from Peter De-Gennaro, who congratulated them on receiving approval and indicated that because his proposal to the board had not been

State v. Ketchum

694 A.2d 916 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · May 5, 1997

State v. … See State v.

State v. Armen

537 A.2d 1143 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Feb 23, 1988

Brown v. Louisiana, 383 U.S. 131, 142 , 86 S.Ct. 719, 724 (1966) (Fortas, J. joined by Warren, C.J. and Douglas, J., plurality) (referring to sit-in by black students at segregated public library). … See Brown v. Louisiana, 383 U.S. 131, 137 , 86 S.Ct. 719, 721 , 15 L.Ed.2d 637 (1966).

Durand's Case

124 Me. 59 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Sep 23, 1924

The policy took in employees in sawmills, lumber yards, work-cooks *61 furnishing board for employees in connection with lumbering risks, drivers and drivers’ helpers, and others. … Timmerman v. Dever, (Mich.), 17 N. W., 280 . A place two miles distant, in reference to the drilling of other oil wells, was not included by the term. Sparks v. Pittsburgh Co., 159 Pa. St., 295.

In re Adoption of Bragg

384 A.2d 435 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Mar 31, 1978

To permit otherwise would “transform the Law Court into an advisory board for the direction of the business of the court at nisi prius, a function the law court cannot assume.” Fidelity & Casualty Co. v. … Small v. Gartley, Me., 363 A.2d 724, 731 (1976). The entry will be: Report discharged. Case dismissed from the law docket. DELAHANTY, J., did not sit. .

Clark v. Metcalf

38 Me. 122 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Jul 1, 1854

Clapp, Adm’x, v. Cofran, 7 Mass. 98 ; Freeman v. Davis & al., 7 Mass. 200 ; Burroughs v. Lowder & al. 8 Mass. 373 ; Howard v. Brown, 21 Maine, 385; Barrows v. Bridge & al. 21 Maine, 398. The case of Metcalf, Adm’r, v. … Hathaway v. Crosby, 17 Maine, 448; Ware v. Jackson, 24 Maine, 166; Fales v Dow, 24 Maine, 211.

Wardwell v. INHABITANTS OF THE TOWN OF CASTINE

144 A.2d 530 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Sep 5, 1958

State v. Harmon, 115 Me. 268 , 98 A. 804 ; Harding *532 ex rel. Erickson v. Brown, 153 Me. 331 , 138 A.2d 635 . … Andrews v. Portland, 79 Me. 484, 490 , 10 A. 458 . The presiding justice properly refused to direct verdicts for the defendant. The entry will be Exceptions overruled.

Davis v. Waterville, Fairfield & Oakland Railway

117 Me. 32 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Dec 13, 1917

A damp snow storm commenced about five in the afternoon and had practically stopped when the plaintiff boarded the car. … Palmer v. Penn. Co., 111 N. Y., 488 . *34 Foster v. Old Colony St.

Hartshorn v. Assessors of Ellsworth

60 Me. 276 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Jul 1, 1872

S., c. 6, § 14, and is as follows : All goods, wares, and merchandise, all logs, lumber, boards, and other lumber, and all stock in trade, including stock employed in the business of any of the mechanic arts, in any town … Rex v. St. Pancras, 3 A. & E., 542. It should expressly state the duty required of the defendant.

Gardiner Cotton & Woolen Factors Co. v. Inhabitants of Gardiner

5 Me. 133 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · May 15, 1827

As well might it be urged that the money invested in a saw mill, is not capital employed in the manufacturing of boards. … This construction was expressly given to a similar section in the tax act of Massachusetts, in the case of the Amesbury Woolen & Cotton Manufacturing Company v. The inhabitants of Amesbury 17. Mass. 461.

Knight v. Loomis

30 Me. 204 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Jul 1, 1849

Saunderson v. Stearns, executor, 6 Mass. 37 ; Prescott v. Pitts & al. 9 Mass. 376 ; Hall v. Cushing & al. 9 Pick. 395 ; Dorr v. Wainwright, 13 Pick. 328 ; Towne v. Ammidown, 20 Pick. 535 . … Wyman v. Hubbard & al. 13 Mass. 232 ; Boynton v. Dyer, 18 Pick. 1 ; Storer v. Storer, 9 Mass. 37 ; Stearns v. Brown, 1 Pick. 530 .

Duffy v. Metropolitan Line Insurance

94 Me. 414 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Dec 8, 1900

Larrabee v. Grant, 70 Maine, 79. … Harmon v. Harmon, 61 Maine, 227; Higgins v. Brown, 78 Maine, 478.

Leavitt v. Davis

153 Me. 279 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Nov 26, 1957

Bessey v. Ollman, 242 Mass. 89, 91 , 136 N. E. 176 , and cases there cited.” … Brown, et al. v. Hojnacki et al. (Ct.), 259 N. W. 152 , 97 A. L. R. 621.