Case law

In re Child of Kimberly K.

2019 ME 145 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Sep 17, 2019

mental health component; participate in a follow-up interview with Family Treatment Drug Court (FTDC); to not use or possess alcohol, illicit drugs, or prescription drugs except when used as prescribed by a qualified … These findings are not clearly erroneous, and the court did not err or abuse its discretion in determining that termination of the parents’ parental rights would ensure permanency for the child and would be in the child

Gordon v. State Tax Assessor

455 A.2d 57 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Jan 25, 1983

The Superior Court correctly found that the “policy” applied by the Bureau was not established by the record and is not stated in Maine tax laws. … Clearly not all of these adjustments are “business-related expenses” or “caused by [the taxpayer’s] occupation” as the Bureau claims they must be.

State v. Bonney

427 A.2d 467 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Mar 24, 1981

The Criminal Code elsewhere sets forth definitions relating to drug offenses, among which is the definition of “trafficking”: As used in this Title, the following words shall, unless the context clearly requires otherwise … The only proof of the contents of the capsules was a signed, sworn certificate of laboratory analysis admitted in lieu of a qualified witness pursuant to 17-A M.R. S.A. § 1112.

Goodwin v. School Administrative District No. 35

721 A.2d 642 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Dec 11, 1998

Her son qualified as both an “exceptional student” within the meaning of 20-A M.R.S.A. § 7001(2) (1993) 2 and as a “student with a disability” within the meaning of section 3 of the Maine Special Education Regulations, Chapter … In the absence of legislative consideration of these issues, we would not imply a legislative intent to create a similar cause of action in the Maine courts. [¶ 15] Recognizing the lack of any clearly expressed intent to

Hunter v. Randall

69 Me. 183 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Feb 18, 1879

By the settled law of this state, this evidence was clearly admissible. … We think it clearly inadmissible.

State v. Noyes

47 Me. 189 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Jul 1, 1859

may be agreed upon, and established from time to time by the directors of said corporation. … It is upon this very provision that railroads are established ordinarily.

Covel v. Hart

56 Me. 518 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Jul 1, 1869

There were no facts to qualify or limit the generality of the grant. … Hart & al., as presented, seems clearly to present facts which, if proved, would entitle the plaintiffs to a judgment in their favor, under the foregoing *527 decision.

Board of Overseers of the Bar v. Dineen

500 A.2d 262 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Nov 4, 1985

It should be noted that Rule 3.4(b) is qualified by Rule 3.4(d), in that representation of differing interests is permitted when: it is obvious that he can adequately represent the interests of each and if each consents to … Assuming arguendo, as did the single justice, that an attorney-client relationship was not established, the appellant’s conduct would still be in violation of M.Bar R. 3.6(m) which provides: Avoiding Misreliance.

State v. Chaplin

286 A.2d 325 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Jan 24, 1972

established.” … There is language in the opinion that suggests that the Johnson Court equated “clearly established” with proof beyond a reasonable doubt.

Handley v. Call

27 Me. 35 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · May 15, 1847

being qualified; that the defendant said to him, that it would make no difference. … But the evidence does present one ground, if there were m> other, upon which it would be clearly reasonable, that we should suffer the cause again to be laid before a jury.

Capitol Bank & Trust Co. v. City of Waterville

343 A.2d 213 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Aug 13, 1975

He may himself demand immediate payment and upon failure he may distrain the property or arrest the person of such taxpayer.” 1 The existence of the plaintiff’s security instrument covering Gullifer’s property did not immunize … The statutes which formulate the summary procedures available to enforce the collection of delinquent taxes assessed against Gullifer clearly give the authority and assign the power to distrain to the tax collector.

Wentworth v. Fernald

92 Me. 282 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Dec 21, 1898

trustee under this will before named, to apply to the Judge of Probate for said County of York for the appointment of trustees to be joined with the trustee under this will, who shall be duly appointed, commissioned and qualified … But this position is clearly untenable.

State of Maine v. Elfido Marroquin-Aldana

89 A.3d 519 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Mar 25, 2014

At a hearing on the issue on April 27, 2012, Marroquin-Aldana argued that the records were necessary to establish Lissette’s motive to fabricate the allegations in this case in order to obtain a U visa. … The court repeatedly asked that counsel and witnesses speak slowly and clearly for the benefit of the interpreters.

Cameron v. Lewiston, Brunswick & Bath Street Railway

103 Me. 482 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Feb 25, 1908

They were calculated to confer upon it the right to exercise all the privileges of its franchise, but not immunity from its negligence. They do not, therefore, exempt it from the consequences of its negligent acts. … The verdict of the jury upon the question of the defendant’s negligence was fully warranted by the evidence and clearly right. (2) Was the plaintiff’s intestate guilty of contributory negligence?

Cushman v. Smith

34 Me. 247 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Jul 1, 1852

The corporation by its charter, is entitled to all the powers, privileges and immunities, and subjected to all the duties and liabilities prescribed in the eighty-first chapter of the Revised Statutes. … The more thoroughly it has been examined in connection with legislative enactments, the more clearly has it been perceived, that serious difficulties, or inconveniences, or losses, may arise in the rigid and uniform application

Woodman v. Pitman

79 Me. 456 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Jun 16, 1887

They ai’e the subjects of qualified property by occupation. 2 Kent’s Com. 348. Each right is in theory, speaking generally, relative or comparative. Each recognizes other rights that may come in its way. … The idea is clearly expressed in 2 Law Quar. Rev.

State v. Corrieri

654 A.2d 419 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Feb 7, 1995

misconduct prejudiced his right to a fair trial, and from the sentence imposed on him contending that it is excessive. 1 Finding no obvious error, we affirm the convictions; and finding no misapplication of principle in establishing … That rule does not immunize a defendant from an evaluation of his or her conduct at trial by the trial court. Such an evaluation was clearly an important factor in the trial court’s sentencing decision.

Estate of Cilley v. Lane

985 A.2d 481 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Dec 29, 2009

Drawing the most favorable inference to the Estate, as we must, this fact still clearly shows that Cilley was no longer welcome in Lane’s home. A licensee who is asked to leave and refuses becomes a trespasser. … pleading, a party shall set forth affirmatively accord and satisfaction, arbitration and award, assumption of risk, comparative fault, discharge in bankruptcy, duress, estoppel, failure of consideration, fraud, illegality, immunity

James Goggin v. State Tax Assessor

191 A.3d 341 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Aug 2, 2018

“Statutory exemptions to taxes are construed narrowly, however,” and we will not apply an exemption “to situations not clearly coming within the scope of the exemption provisions.” Id. … They argue that the trial court misapplied the applicable four-part constitutional test that was established in Complete Auto Transit, Inc. v.

Simmons v. State Ex Rel. State Highway Commission

222 A.2d 366 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Aug 26, 1966

estate dealer, who, on the evening of the first day of trial, had refreshed his recollection on principles of real estate appraising from the reference book, which he owned, and which he had used as a text in preparing to qualify … investigation, trial court held “the incident was entirely harmless” and upon exceptions it was held that the trial court’s discretion “cannot be reviewed by an appellate court unless it is made to appear that the decision was clearly