Case law

United States v. Abell

552 F. Supp. 316 · District Court, D. Maine · Nov 23, 1982

This is clearly sufficient to establish a prima facie case of discrimination against women in the selection of grand jury forepersons. … I find that these criteria are not only reasonably objective, but also clearly relevant to the tasks of the grand jury foreperson as set forth in Rule 6(c) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure.

Harris v. International Paper Co.

765 F. Supp. 1509 · District Court, D. Maine · Mar 28, 1991

The plaintiffs initial burden, however, is to establish a four-part prima facie case: (1) that the plaintiff belongs to a protected group, (2) that he applied and was qualified for a job for which the employer was seeking … Plaintiffs established their prima facie cases), and that Defendant’s rebuttal argument was not supported by sufficient evidence to warrant a finding other than that Plaintiffs were qualified for promotion.

Union Mutual Life Insurance v. United States

420 F. Supp. 1181 · District Court, D. Maine · Sep 14, 1976

The evidence clearly establishes, however, that the taxpayer nonetheless recognized an obligation to use these funds solely for the purpose of paying the mortgagor’s property taxes and hazard insurance premiums. … The record in the present case clearly establishes that the mortgage escrow funds here under consideration were held in trust by the mortgage correspondents for the purpose of paying obligations of the mortgagors, that they

Kidder v. RICHMOND AREA HEALTH CENTER, INC.

595 F. Supp. 2d 139 · District Court, D. Maine · Jan 29, 2009

United States Citing statutory law, the Federal Defendants contend that the United States is the sole proper defendant in an action against defendants deemed Public Health Service employees and approved delivery sites for qualifying … Both the FTCA and the MHSA establish procedural preconditions to the filing of a cause of action under the respective statutes.

Bruns v. Mayhew

931 F. Supp. 2d 260 · District Court, D. Maine · Mar 14, 2013

“The party seeking the preliminary injunction bears the burden of establishing that these four factors weigh in its favor.” Id. … First, the Court concludes that the Plaintiffs have not established that the Commissioner violated their equal protection rights.

Carmichael v. Verso Paper, LLC

679 F. Supp. 2d 109 · District Court, D. Maine · Jan 5, 2010

Carmichael has a qualifying disability — is not contested; the Court turns to the second and third elements. ii. Qualified Individual Mr. … Carmichael must establish that: (1) he suffered from a “disability” within the meaning of the statute; (2) he was a qualified individual in that he was able to perform the essential functions of his job, either with or without

Lyons v. Louisiana Pacific Corp.

217 F. Supp. 2d 171 · District Court, D. Maine · Sep 4, 2002

Alfred Calcagni & Sons, Inc., 44 F.3d 1, 4-5 (1st Cir.1994) (“When an interested witness has given clear answers to unambiguous questions, he cannot create a conflict and resist summary judgment with an affidavit that is clearly … As discussed above, Lyons has not established any genuine issues of material fact in dispute on this point.

Mumme v. United States Department of Labor

150 F. Supp. 2d 162 · District Court, D. Maine · Jul 17, 2001

The principle of sovereign immunity generally bars all tort claims against the United States. … The United States retains sovereign immunity against such a claim. See id.

United States v. Romano

241 F. Supp. 933 · District Court, D. Maine · May 19, 1965

United States, supra. [4] Under the view of Aldrich, J., concurring in Rosencranz, all three present defendants clearly have standing to file pretrial motions to suppress the evidence in question, since they are "parties … Clearly in the present case it furnished "a substantial basis for crediting" the anonymous information received by the affiant, Jones v.

Shostak v. United States Postal Service

662 F. Supp. 158 · District Court, D. Maine · Jun 9, 1987

Plaintiff was sent such a letter of termination on February 9 and was able to pass a qualifying test on February 11, thereby avoiding automatic termination. … In addition, the Court finds it probative that there has clearly been no pattern of age discrimination at the Lewiston Post Office.

Wood v. United States

148 F. Supp. 2d 68 · District Court, D. Maine · Jun 21, 2001

Generally, a plaintiff bears the burden of establishing subject matter jurisdiction. See Pejepscot Indus. Park, Inc. v. Maine Cent. R. Co., 215 F.3d 195, 200 (1st Cir.2000). … To the extent such a crack in the United States’ sovereign immunity possibly exists, Plaintiffs claims simply do not fit through this narrow opening. IV.

United States v. Oliveira

287 F. Supp. 3d 97 · District Court, D. Maine · Dec 12, 2017

Mulkern's guilty plea to trafficking in heroin, a crime that under Maine law is established by a two gram threshold. Id. … As used in Maine criminal statutes, unless the context clearly requires otherwise, "traffick" means: A. To make, create, manufacture; B. To grow or cultivate, except for marijuana; C.

Nichols v. Land Transport Corp.

103 F. Supp. 2d 25 · District Court, D. Maine · Nov 9, 1999

actions that are done with a private, rather than a work-related, purpose to commit wrongdoing are outside of the scope of employment and render the motivation of the employee, in performing the act at issue a crucial, immunity-related … This requirement relates directly to the foreseeability of the agent’s act, and establishes the simple principle that the master should not be held responsible for the agent’s conduct when that conduct is outside the contours

Fiacco v. Sigma Alpha Epsilon Fraternity

484 F. Supp. 2d 158 · District Court, D. Maine · Apr 5, 2007

From the ample record before the Court, Fiacco qualifies as a public official. … This Court has previously established three maxims with regard to what qualifies as a public controversy: “purely private disputes do not give rise to public controversies, the implications of the controversy in question

SHUTE v. PROVINCE OF NEW BRUNSWICK

District Court, D. Maine · Jan 7, 2025

Plaintiff’s claims, however, do not qualify for this exception because he does not allege personal injury, death, or damage to or loss of property. … establish the immunity of a foreign official, a court2 must find that (1) the actor is a public minister, official, or agent of the foreign state; (2) the act was performed as part of the actor’s official duty; and (3)

United States v. Currier

644 F. Supp. 228 · District Court, D. Maine · Sep 18, 1986

After a careful review of the evidence in respect to these four convictions, the Court concludes that the Government has failed to establish by a preponderance of the evidence that the Defendant qualifies as a “special offender … The record clearly reflects that the convictions are on appeal to the Maine Law Court.

CENTRAL MAINE MEDICAL CENTER v. Leavitt

552 F. Supp. 2d 50 · District Court, D. Maine · Apr 16, 2008

Medicare is a national program of health insurance for the aged and disabled established by enactment of the Medicare Act in 1965. See, e.g., Telecare Corp. v. … Beyond that, he argued, the Tax, which was assessed on patient-care revenues, clearly is related to patient-care services.

ISMAIL v. ROBINSON

District Court, D. Maine · Feb 26, 2024

Next, he contends that, even if a constitutional violation occurred, “he nevertheless would be entitled to qualified immunity because any constitutional violation was not clearly established.” Id. … S/A Robinson Is Entitled to Qualified Immunity S/A Robinson finally asserts that he is entitled to qualified immunity, reasoning that “[a]lthough there was no constitutional violation

Final Exit Network, Inc. v. Ellison

370 F. Supp. 3d 995 · District Court, D. Maine · Feb 22, 2019

The plaintiff bears the burden of establishing standing. Spokeo , 136 S.Ct. at 1547 . … In response, the Plaintiffs argue in passing that their claims fall within the Ex parte Young exception to Eleventh Amendment immunity, under which a suit for injunctive or declaratory relief avoids sovereign immunity if

Venable v. T-MOBILE USA, INC.

603 F. Supp. 2d 211 · District Court, D. Maine · Mar 20, 2009

Qualified to Perform Essential Functions To succeed on either theory, Ms. Venable must show that she was qualified to perform the essential functions of her job with or without a reasonable accommodation. … In effect, so long as the employer could point to some flaw in an employee’s performance that it can cast as failing an essential function, T-Mobile would have its decision to terminate the employee be immune from judicial