Case law

Avangrid Networks, Inc. v. Secretary of State

2020 ME 109 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Aug 13, 2020

Because the Secretary of State has expressed his willingness to heed a clearly stated declaration from us, we see no necessity for injunctive relief. I. … Thus, 9The Legislature has enacted a narrow exception to the exclusive grant of review to the courts, by means of a statute allowing a utility to apply to the Legislature “to grant a right, privilege or immunity which

Avangrid Networks, Inc. v. Secretary of State

2020 ME 109 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Aug 13, 2020

Because the Secretary of State has expressed his willingness to heed a clearly stated declaration from us, we see no necessity for injunctive relief. I. … Thus, 9The Legislature has enacted a narrow exception to the exclusive grant of review to the courts, by means of a statute allowing a utility to apply to the Legislature “to grant a right, privilege or immunity which

Bowie v. Delta Airlines, Inc.

661 A.2d 1128 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Jul 18, 1995

As one Legislator commented in the floor debates, “clearly [a retiree] can not expect to be receiving wages after choosing and seeking retirement and retirement benefits. … other words, a retired worker must demonstrate by a preponderance of the evidence that the work-related impairment precludes him from performing any other work, either within or without his field of skill, for which he is qualified

Tucker v. Madden

44 Me. 206 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Jul 1, 1857

If the mistake stated in the bill is clearly shown, it cannot be denied that the plaintiff is without remedy, unless it can be afforded by a court having equity jurisdiction. … But with the explanations in the answer, which is responsive to the bill, its force is much qualified.

State v. Jones

405 A.2d 149 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Jul 11, 1979

My concern is what are they trying to establish? THE COURT: That he was there.” … Appellant now concedes on appeal that the statement qualifies as an admission but contends that such a construction “clearly erodes the fifth amendment right of the defendant not to testify in his own behalf.”

State v. Libby

153 Me. 1 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · May 23, 1957

Whether an expert witness is qualified is a preliminary question to be determined by the presiding justice. … The record before us discloses that the expert clearly possessed special skill and experience and a knowledge of the results of technical research in his field.

Shaw v. Hussey

41 Me. 495 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Jul 1, 1856

Our inquiry is, whether the second item was essentially qualified by the sixth, in reference to the real estate. … And authorities, which have been cited in support of the rule, establish the exception. And this Court in the case of McLellan v.

Ex parte Davis

41 Me. 38 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Jul 1, 1856

, he was duly appointed and commissioned by the Governor, a Justice of the Supreme Judicial Court; that afterwards he took and subscribed the oaths required by the constitution of this State and of the United States, to qualify … It is understood by all, having knowledge pf proceedings in criminal matters, that the greatest accuracy and technicality is required, and a material error therein, is an immunity to the accused.

State v. Lewis

584 A.2d 622 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Dec 20, 1990

That finding is not clearly erroneous. Moreover, at the critical time of Lewis’s trial, there was no indication of incompetence. … The finding of the court that the tape did not contain exculpatory evidence will not be disturbed on appeal unless clearly erroneous. See State v. Barczak, 562 A.2d 140, 144 (Me.1989).

In re Child of Barni A.

2024 ME 16 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Jan 31, 2024

But the plan failed to mention that the child legally qualifies for 24/7 nursing care under MaineCare. … Furthermore, the record clearly shows that the mother was not afforded a realistic opportunity to meet the child’s medical needs because the mother’s visits with the child were severely limited due to the COVID-19 pandemic

State v. Poulin

268 A.2d 475 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Aug 6, 1970

The photograph was qualified as a fair and accurate representation of what it purported to depict. … Here also the photograph was qualified as a fair and accurate representation of what it purported to depict.

Cloutier v. Anctil

155 Me. 300 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Aug 20, 1959

The framers of the Charter exercised extreme care in order to clearly set forth and define the duties and responsibilities of the Board of Finance. … After his death the pension automatically continues and is paid *306 to the person or persons qualified to receive it under the provisions of Sec. 21 of the Charter. The entry will be Exceptions overruled.

Dyer v. Maine Drilling & Blasting, Inc.

984 A.2d 210 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Dec 17, 2009

Roman Catholic Bishop of Portland, 2009 ME 67, ¶ 27 , 974 A.2d 286, 295 (discussing doctrine of charitable immunity) (quotation marks omitted). 3. … Stare Decisis [¶ 28] Although we afford great weight to the value of precedent under the doctrine of stare decisis, “[precedents, once so established, ... do not become totally immune from change for all time.

Cox v. COASTAL PRODUCTS COMPANY, INC.

774 A.2d 347 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Jul 2, 2001

Mooney testified, however, that, because it was an unusually busy day and because Cox was not qualified to do Mooney’s job as supervisor of the plant, “it made sense” to send Cox to make the delivery. … to engage in that personal business that *349 day because he first made the delivery for the employer and the fact that the trip as a whole was authorized by the employer and required the use of the employer’s vehicle, establish

Estate of Weeks

462 A.2d 44 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Jul 11, 1983

Billington is a devisee under the will, a contingent beneficiary of a testamentary trust established by the will, the testator’s daughter by a prior marriage, and his only child. … No. 9A455, § 2002(d)(1), 90 Stat. 1856 , clearly establishes that the change in the limit on the allowable marital deduction contained in the 1976 Tax Reform Act applies to estates of decedents dying after December 31, 1976

Blood v. Palmer

11 Me. 414 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Jun 15, 1834

Here an attempt is made to establish as a sale, what does not appear on the face of it, to have been so intended. *420 In Marsh v. … Wickham, 14 Johns. 167 , a sale of a quantity of leather was clearly made and intended, but qualified with the privilege of returning such portions of it, as might remain on hand at the time of settlement. In Hurd v.

State v. Dhuy

825 A.2d 336 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Jun 4, 2003

connection with the appeal of the District Court judgment, and independent of the District Court action, the Board entered an order concluding that “Dhuy, by virtue of his passing the licensure examination in 1999, currently qualifies … Emerson, 425 A.2d 978, 982 (Me.1981)). [¶ 16] “In order to establish a constitutional equal protection violation based on selective prosecution or selective enforcement, a plaintiff must at a minimum establish that the challenged

Woodman v. Woodman

89 Me. 128 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Apr 9, 1896

for coming to the enjoyment *134 of tbe estate being fixed by an event certain, tbe right of enjoyment, by a person then in being, immediately-upon tbe occurrence of tbe event and tbe termination of tbe prior estate, was established … Where an estate is devised to a person expressly for life, with a power of disposal qualified or unqualified, *137 the devisee takes an estate for life only. Stuart v. Walker, 72 Maine, 145.

State v. Hebert

480 A.2d 742 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Jul 2, 1984

The purpose of the examination was clearly to allow medical diagnosis, and Christina’s statement was pertinent thereto. 9 Cf. State v. … MacM-ahon clearly understood he was conducting the examination for the purpose of medical *749 diagnosis.

State v. Sanborn

157 Me. 424 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Sep 15, 1961

Edward Reynolds qualified his previous testimony that he had sold no furniture to anyone in 1956 and testified that he had sold furniture to employees, but not to George Webber. … Those cases clearly establish the law of this court, that courts of justice are invested with the authority to discharge a jury from giving any verdict, whenever in their opinion, taking all the circumstances into consideration