Case law

Tobin v. University of Maine System

59 F. Supp. 2d 87 · District Court, D. Maine · Jul 1, 1999

Rather, the reduced tuition rates are a benefit enjoyed by in-state residents who have been deemed qualified for admission and have been so admitted. … See Perry, 408 U.S. at 595 , 92 S.Ct. 2694 . *95 additional Count IV arguments concerning sovereign immunity. 3 .

Ramirez v. DeCoster

194 F.R.D. 348 · District Court, D. Maine · Mar 31, 2000

To establish a prima facie case under the McDonnell Douglas framework, a plaintiff must show: (i) that he belongs to a racial minority; (ii) that he applied for and was qualified for a job for which the employer was seeking … Section 1981, on the other hand, is a damages statute “aimed at rectifying individual acts of discrimination against racial and ethnic minorities ... and it clearly lacks a ‘make-whole’ purpose.” Id. at 748 .

United States v. Bryant

291 F. Supp. 542 · District Court, D. Maine · Oct 11, 1968

This sensible procedure, which was also followed to a lesser extent in constituting the Southern Division pool, was clearly justified under the statute. Katz v. … In the present cases while defendants have shown certain disparities in the composition of the jury pools, they have not established that the failure of the jury selection system to provide statistical perfection resulted

SOUCY v. SERGEANT THOMAS AVERILL

District Court, D. Maine · Feb 24, 2020

to “identify cognizable claims or dismiss the complaint, or any portion of the complaint, if the complaint (1) is frivolous, malicious, or fails to state a claim …; or (2) seeks monetary relief from a defendant who is immune … Subject to limited exceptions not applicable in this case, the State of Maine has immunity under the Eleventh Amendment against suits brought by citizens in federal court, regardless of the form of relief requested.

Pearl Investments, LLC v. Standard I/O, Inc.

257 F. Supp. 2d 326 · District Court, D. Maine · Apr 23, 2003

Pearl attempts to deny this statement, see Plaintiff's Opposing SMF ¶ 25, but its denial is not fairly supported by the citations given, which do not clearly demonstrate that Chunn made use of the specific components in issue … This statement effectively qualifies, rather than controverts, Pearl’s statement.

Harlow v. Potter

353 F. Supp. 2d 109 · District Court, D. Maine · Jan 27, 2005

Harlow’s prima facie case are clearly met: she is a woman; she was fired; and comparably qualified persons continued to perform her work responsibilities. 8 Whether Ms. … Harlow’s duties were performed by a comparably qualified person. 9 . When Ms. Harlow refused to work with Ms. McArthur, Mr.

Maine Human Rights Commission v. Sunbury Primary Care, P.A.

770 F. Supp. 2d 370 · District Court, D. Maine · Mar 14, 2011

Stephens was saying and would be able to express herself more clearly. 10 PSAMF ¶ 171; DRPSAMF ¶ 171. Ms. … Carney without a translator, that he would not move on from one medical topic unless he felt that he had clearly covered it, and that Ms.

CRANDALL v. ORONO POLICE DEPARTMENT

District Court, D. Maine · Apr 29, 2025

Here, consistent with this well-established precedent, the Court agrees with the Magistrate Judge that Mr. … To succeed on a claim pursuant to Title II of the ADA, a plaintiff must establish: (1) that he is a qualified individual with a disability; (2) that he was either excluded from participation in or denied the

United States v. Oakes

411 F. Supp. 2d 1 · District Court, D. Maine · Jan 20, 2006

A plea does not qualify as voluntary and intelligent unless the defendant: (1) was informed of the nature of the charges against him and all direct consequences of his plea; and (2) understood the constitutional rights that … Even if the Court determined that an additional evidentiary showing by the Government was necessary, the record in this case clearly establishes that the Government would be able to make that showing.

Canal National Bank v. United States

258 F. Supp. 626 · District Court, D. Maine · Jul 25, 1966

The Supreme Court has spoken clearly and explicitly as to the test that must be used in this type of case for determining whether a bequest to charity is sufficiently definite and ascertainable to qualify for the charitable … In DuBois and Sprunt the court found that the trust was established primarily for private, and not for public charitable purposes. 9 . See Treas.Reg. 20.2055-2 (b).

James v. GMAC Mortgage LLC

772 F. Supp. 2d 307 · District Court, D. Maine · Mar 24, 2011

While the question is a close one, James has established a dispute of material fact on this issue. … In the alternative, James purportedly qualifies his response, denying that Quicken’s actions were mistaken. Id.

United States v. Webster

28 F. Cas. 509 · District Court, D. Maine · Jun 15, 1840

The same authority which establishes the usage may change it. for customary law is abrogated by the establishment of a contrary custom. But while it remains unchanged, it is binding. … An authority of this kind seems to me to be clearly implied, in the reasoning of the court in the case which have been before mentioned. “The amount of compensation,” says Mr.

Maine Education Ass'n Benefits Trust v. Cioppa

842 F. Supp. 2d 386 · District Court, D. Maine · Feb 3, 2012

Once eligibility has been established, the school board and the employees decide together, by a collaborative vote, whether the employees will be offered the MEABT plan. … CONCLUSION Ultimately, the Court concludes that Plaintiffs have not established a substantial likelihood of success or the necessary irreparable harm.

Georgia-Pacific Corporation v. WHDH CORPORATION

374 F. Supp. 1076 · District Court, D. Maine · May 1, 1974

WHDH has never qualified to do business in Maine, maintains no office in Maine, and has no agents or employees in Maine. … Clearly, the relationship between WHDH and St. Croix was not, as defendant argues, a “naked buyer-seller relationship,” Leesona Corp. v. Concordia Mfg.

CASCO BANK & TRUST COMPANY v. United States

406 F. Supp. 247 · District Court, D. Maine · Dec 2, 1975

It is stipulated that these organizations are qualified Section 170(c) charities. … The Commissioner acknowledges this, as indeed he must, if he seeks to establish any income tax liability in the trust.

Levitt v. Sonardyne, Inc.

918 F. Supp. 2d 74 · District Court, D. Maine · Jan 15, 2013

He asserts that the amendment is therefore not futile and the amended complaint “clearly meets” the federal pleading standard. Id. at 6. E. … They dispute only whether their alleged sales of diver detection equipment to China can qualify as an unsafe practice.

United States v. Murphy

681 F. Supp. 2d 95 · District Court, D. Maine · Feb 4, 2010

He contends that absent a hearing to determine actual dangerousness, “the Government has not established that Mr. Murphy falls within a class of those who are inherently dangerous? due to a mental illness.” … Although the Court has the ability to follow clearly intervening Supreme Court authority, the First Circuit issued Chamberlain and Holt after Addington and Vitek so Mr. Murphy?

Hoffman v. Secretary of State of Maine

574 F. Supp. 2d 179 · District Court, D. Maine · Aug 29, 2008

As a result, 183 signatures were voided, the candidate ended up without the necessary 4,000 qualifying signatures, and his name will not appear on the November ballot. … Clearly, then, these petition signers’ First and Fourteenth Amendment rights are at stake here.

In re New Motor Vehicles Canadian Export Antitrust Litigation

243 F.R.D. 17 · District Court, D. Maine · Jun 15, 2007

Clearly, each statewide damage class will have to prove that it qualifies for damage relief under the state statute in question, and my certification order reflects that. No more should be necessary. … I have established briefing schedules accordingly, but they may need adjustment. SO ORDERED.

Stinson Canning Co., Inc. v. Mosbacher

731 F. Supp. 32 · District Court, D. Maine · Feb 5, 1990

The Court qualified its position in certain instances in which the aggrieved party had actual notice of the proposed rule. Id. … The Secretary’s interpretation of the regulation, therefore, is not clearly erroneous.