Case law

McAfee v. Wright

651 A.2d 371 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Dec 21, 1994

We will not set aside a finding of fact by a trial court unless it is “clearly erroneous.” Morin Bldg. Prod. Co. v. Atlantic Design & Constr. Co., 615 A.2d 239, 241 (Me.1992). … Holding that a fiduciary relationship, alone, is sufficient to qualify for an exception to the general rule would all but swallow the rule.

Decrow v. Moody

73 Me. 100 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Dec 27, 1881

James Moody, the defendant, qualified as executor of' the will in January, 1877 ; and from the admitted facts, it would seem that there was property enough to meet all the calls of the will, though the executor has never … But with the doctrine once thoroughly established, as it now is, that no form of words will make a condition precedent, when placing ourselves in the situation of the testator, we can see clearly that such could not have

State v. Gervais

303 A.2d 459 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Apr 10, 1973

The evidence reveals that Engermann had been given immunity by the prosecution to testify against defendant. … The presence of the drugs in the defendant’s kitchen does not, ipso facto, suffice to establish that defendant “possessed” them; and the jury might have concluded that the other factors necessary to establish “possession”

State v. Long

656 A.2d 1228 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Apr 27, 1995

Long first contends that the court improperly precluded LaFlamme from testifying that he knew who set fire to his trailer because an adequate foundation for LaF-lamme’s personal knowledge was established. … “[I]f a witness personally hears another make a statement, he is qualified to testify under Rule 602 that such statement was made.

In Re Nikolas E.

720 A.2d 562 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Nov 19, 1998

McIntosh’s [sic] feels that because Ni-kolas’s blood tests (viral load count and CD4 cell count) meet the CDC guidelines qualifying him for aggressive drug therapy, the child may well benefit from such treatment. … Thus, the court was not clearly erroneous in remaining unpersuaded that jeopardy had been established. [¶ 23] We emphasize that the decision required the trial court to weigh the interests of the State, the child, and the

Kennebec County v. Maine Public Employees Retirement System

86 A.3d 1204 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Feb 20, 2014

Section 18252-A thus establishes a comprehensive plan for allocating authority among the PLD, MPERS, and the Board in a variety of situations. 10 [¶ 17] The third statutory provision at issue, 5 M.R.S. § 17108, establishes … Auth., 2009 ME 116, ¶ 5 , 983 A.2d 1065 ("[A]ll statutes will be considered to have a prospective operation only, unless the legislative intent to the contrary is clearly expressed or necessarily implied from the language

Bragdon v. Smith

136 Me. 474 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Apr 29, 1940

Smith, is the duly qualified executor of the decedent, Hoyt L. … In so finding, the court was clearly right.

Adoption of G.

529 A.2d 809 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Aug 19, 1987

Although we conclude that the Probate Court’s finding of jeopardy was clearly erroneous, we hold that parental rights were appropriately withheld and we affirm the order granting the adoption petition. I. … After three hearings in that court, the judge determined that Richard M. had standing to attempt to qualify as a putative father pursuant to section 532-C.

Stephen Doane v. Department of Health and Human Services

250 A.3d 1101 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · May 13, 2021

The definition of “qualified” is not included in the federal statute. … Servs., 97 A.3d 241, 248 (N.H. 2014) (noting that states have “considerable authority” to establish qualifications). 16 C. Issue Preclusion [¶28] Dr.

Scott Paper Co. v. State Tax Assessor

610 A.2d 275 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Jul 17, 1992

A party claiming a tax exemption has the burden of establishing that the claimed exemption is clearly within the provisions of the statute. Id. … It is well established Maine law that "an exemption from taxation, while entitled to reasonable interpretation in accordance with its purpose, is not to be extended by application to situations not clearly coming within the

State v. McMahon

557 A.2d 1324 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Apr 24, 1989

In support of a traffic safety roadblock, we recognized the vital interest the State has in protecting its citizens from persons not qualified to drive or, because of a record of serious driving offenses, declared incompetent … Murray, Maine Evidence § 103.2, at 7 & n. 12 (1987) (“A mere general objection, if overruled, preserves nothing for review on appeal unless it clearly appears that the evidence was not admissible for any purpose whatsoever

Maine Pharmaceutical Ass'n v. Board of the Commissioners of the Profession of Pharmacy

245 A.2d 271 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Sep 6, 1968

Smith does not qualify to take the examination unless the Resolve is valid and constitutional. … If, however, the act of the Legislature falls clearly beyond the limits of constitutional authority the Court must not hesitate to declare such action void.

In re Beauchene

951 A.2d 81 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Jul 3, 2008

We must affirm the Superior Court’s decision unless that court acted irrationally in failing to be satisfied that clear and convincing evidence showed Beauchene to be qualified for release. LaDew v. … We conclude that the court’s second statement clearly establishes its finding that the threat Beauchene poses is a likely result of the mental disease or defect that the jury found Beauchene to have in 1970.

Johnson v. Maine & New Brunswick Insurance

83 Me. 182 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Feb 23, 1891

The material facts established by the admissions and evidence are these : — James H. … It purported to state an absolute fact, lie did not qualify it, by any reference to belief, or understanding.

Williams v. Kinney

220 A.2d 234 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · May 31, 1966

French, 121 Me. 4, 6 , 115 A. 420 , or an overtaking vehicle has a qualified right of way, O’Malia v. Thomas, 123 Me. 286, 287 , 122 A. 773 . … “No vehicle shall be driven to the left side of the center of the roadway in overtaking and passing another vehicle proceeding in the same direction unless such left side is clearly visible and is free of oncoming traffic

Alpha Rho Zeta of Lambda Chi Alpha, Inc. v. Inhabitants of Waterville

477 A.2d 1131 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · May 25, 1984

The record clearly reveals that both have some of the incidents of ownership. … One fraternity house was turned into a dormitory for non-fraternity students for one full year by decision of the College, when its occupancy fell below the level established by the College. 4.

Hutchins v. Merrill

109 Me. 313 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Sep 17, 1912

It is an elementary principle respecting the judicial character and function and a firmly established rule of law that judges and arbitrators enjoy immunity from private actions for damages against them for judgments rendered … The English cases clearly and strongly support the defendant’s contention that an action will not lie against an arbitrator or quasi arbitrator for negligence in the exercise of his honest judgment. Pappa v. Rose, 7 L.

Chapman v. Inhabitants of Limerick

56 Me. 390 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Jul 1, 1868

But the question here is, whether the required fact has been sufficiently established by the parol proof? … But, if wo sanction this mode of authentication in such a case, wo establish a doctrine, which will be far reaching in its effects.

Snyder v. Haagen

679 A.2d 510 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Jun 14, 1996

A trial court’s factual finding concerning the location of a boundary will not be disturbed on appeal unless it is clearly erroneous. Rhoda v. Fitzpatrick, 655 A.2d 357, 360 (Me.1995). … The court’s decision was not clearly erroneous. 8 The entry is: Judgment affirmed. All concurring. *516 [[Image here]] 1 .

Perkins v. Graves

642 A.2d 1349 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Jun 7, 1994

In response, Perkins hired surveyor George Barnes to review the deeds and establish the location of the boundary. … As to the court’s actual placement of the boundaries, we will not disturb the court’s factual findings on the location of monuments referenced in the deed unless they are clearly erroneous. Tremblay v.