Case law

First Nat. Bank of Boston v. Maine Turnpike Auth.

153 Me. 131 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Oct 21, 1957

It was only a qualified right. It was not paramount, but subordinate. … The defendant, then, clearly had the right to construct sewers in its streets. If it did so reasonably and properly, it was only in the lawful exercise of its right.

American Ice Co. v. South Gardiner Lumber Co.

107 Me. 494 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Feb 15, 1911

In the brief of the learned counsel for the defendant it is said : "The defendant will not contend in this court that the finding that the fire was caused by sparks from the stack was so clearly and manifestly wrong as to … But the plaintiff claims that there is evidence in the case which shows that the defendant knew and appreciated that there was a danger of fire from the stack, notwithstanding the history of its use with immunity from fire

Johnson v. South Blue Hill Cemetery Association

221 A.2d 280 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Jun 27, 1966

Such interest asserted by him in good faith qualifies the plaintiff in bringing this action for construction. … The very name of certain organizations indicates clearly that their general purposes are charitable.

State v. Reed

62 Me. 129 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Jul 1, 1874

They were in the first instance plainly told that “the guilt of the prisoner must be established beyond a reasonable doubt.” … This as the case shows, was a part of the explanation referred to under the last objection, and as such, was clearly admissible.

Wilson & Son v. Harrisburg

107 Me. 207 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Oct 11, 1910

By this designation, I understand an owner of land bounded generally upon a stream of water, and as such having a qualified property in the soil to the thread of the stream with the privileges annexed thereto by law.” 3. … ice in the winter of 1908-9, and the construction of the ice slip as threatened by the defendants, would have involved a continuing trespass during that and each succeeding season, and the interference of the plaintiffs’ established

Lermond v. Hyler

121 Me. 54 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Dec 23, 1921

Bullard, 151 Mass., 324 For, qualifying heirs as it does, it can only mean heirs ascertained as of that time. … “Then” is clearly used as an adjective.

Poulin v. Colby College

402 A.2d 846 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Jun 6, 1979

Tulley, in her testimony, clearly stated that plaintiff was re-crossing the roadway when he fell. A careful review of plaintiff’s testimony, in light of Mrs. … It is well established in this jurisdiction that a motion for a mistrial is addressed to the sound discretion of the trial Justice. See State v. Lindsey, Me., 400 A.2d 368 (1979); Cope v.

Adoption of Isabelle T.

175 A.3d 639 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Nov 30, 2017

. [¶6] The fundamental right to parent one’s child is not, however, immune from government interference. See Pitts v. … Moore, 2014 ME 59, ¶ 12, 90 A.3d 1169 (action to establish de facto parent status); Rideout v.

Opinion of the Justices of the Supreme Judicial Court

601 A.2d 610 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Jun 20, 1991

Commission empowered to establish prices; public hearing. … As a general rule, excise taxes used to subsidize traditional Maine agricultural and fishing industries are particularly immune from invalidation by the court, since the widespread public benefits of these expenditures can

Acadia Insurance Co. v. Buck Construction Co.

756 A.2d 515 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Aug 9, 2000

Although both contain the phrase “necessary insurance,” the phrase is qualified in each instance by a list. … one party to indemnify another party for its own negligence, see Emery Waterhouse, 467 A.2d at 993 (stating such agreements are looked on with disfavor and “[i]t is only where the contract on its face by its very terms clearly

Raisin Memorial Trust v. Casey

945 A.2d 1211 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Apr 1, 2008

The note also established late charges “of $100.00 per day of any payment not received by the Note Holder within 15 days after the payment is due.” … In its opposing statement of material facts, a party must “explicitly admit, deny, or qualify facts by reference to each numbered paragraph, and a denial or qualification must be supported by a record citation.”

Inhabitants of Town of Beals v. Beal

150 Me. 80 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Mar 18, 1954

Any person or persons from anywhere may be employed if qualified to make the ferry “efficient” and “safe.” … A ferry is the continuation of a highway and it is clearly within the power of the Legislature to grant authority over a highway or over a ferry to a Municipal Corporation even if not within the original boundaries of the

Lee v. Scotia Prince Cruises Ltd.

828 A.2d 210 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Jun 17, 2003

. [¶ 5] In March 2001, Scotia informed Lee that he was no longer viewed as qualified to do his job. … The court then allowed evidence regarding *215 these transactions for the purposes of establishing Scotia’s counterclaim for breach of fiduciary duty and breach of contract.

Comeau v. Maine Coastal Services

449 A.2d 362 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Aug 17, 1982

An injury that cannot meet the requirements of the standards there laid down does not qualify as compensable under the Act. … That the adoption of the “quantum theory” is the result of the Court’s opinion is clearly displayed by the language there used.

Matthew Pollack v. Jessica Fournier

237 A.3d 149 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Jun 25, 2020

that the suit was based on some activity that would qualify as an exercise of the defendant’s First Amendment right to petition the government.” … injured party for the inability to use money rightfully belonging to that party between the date suit is filed and the date judgment is entered, and second, it encourages the defendant to conclude a pretrial settlement of clearly

Allen v. Quinn

459 A.2d 1098 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Apr 29, 1983

In the midst of this specificity, with one time limitation on filing clearly defined, a court must be chary of reading another time limitation into section 18(1) by implication. … The Legislature may enact laws not inconsistent with the Constitution to establish procedures for determination of the validity of written petitions.

State v. Poulliot

726 A.2d 210 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Feb 23, 1999

The court’s finding that probable cause existed to believe Poulliot had committed attempted murder was not clearly erroneous. [¶ 7] In deciding that it was appropriate to try Poulliot as an adult, the court properly considered … TESTIMONY BY EXPERTS If scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge will assist the trier of fact to understand the evidence or to determine a fact in issue, a witness qualified as an expert by knowledge, skill,

Prentiss v. Roberts

49 Me. 127 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Jul 1, 1861

matter where an attempt was made to show carelessness, in the defendant’s engineer, by evidence of spe *137 eific acts of carelessness in running the train, on other occasions than the one in question, was adjudged to he clearly … The license being so qualified, the reservation of the lien is asserted on the part of the one who had the title, and it is denied on the other.

Hall v. Inhabitants of Unity

57 Me. 529 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Jul 1, 1868

. *535 The case we are considering is clearly distinguishable from that of parallel roads, suffered by a town to be indifferently used for the purposes of travel. … After a highway has been duly laid out and established, it is the duty of the town to make the same safe and convenient for travelers thereon.

Cunningham v. Long

125 Me. 494 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Dec 1, 1926

This is an action in assumpsit brought by the plaintiff, admittedly the duly appointed and qualified receiver of the Maine Potato Growers’ Exchange, to recover from the defendant a balance of $336.81, the items of debit charged … The ruling of a presiding Justice, denying a motion for continuance, is clearly a matter of discretion, and in the absence of anything tending to show that this discretion was not properly exercised the ruling is not subject