Case law

Western World Insurance v. American & Foreign Insurance

180 F. Supp. 2d 224 · District Court, D. Maine · Jan 14, 2002

Thus, to the extent Hinton’s alleged acts or omissions qualified as “professional services,” the Royal exclusion pertained to the Town as well. … The acts of Killam Associates in this respect clearly required the specialized knowledge and mental skill of a professional engineer.”); Antles v. Aetna Cas. & Sur.

MCCURDY v. STATE OF MAINE

District Court, D. Maine · Mar 18, 2020

Petitioner, therefore, has not established that the state court decision was contrary to or an unreasonable application of clearly established federal law as determined by the Supreme Court. C. … The state court’s rejection of Petitioner’s claims regarding the jury instructions, therefore, was not contrary to or an unreasonable application of clearly established federal law as determined by the Supreme Court.

Net 2 Press, Inc. v. 58 Dix Avenue Corp.

266 F. Supp. 2d 146 · District Court, D. Maine · Jan 31, 2003

In any event, Grandehamp’s statement is one of opinion, the basis for which is established by the surrounding information provided in the declaration. … Even if the designation could reasonably be read on its face to extend to the entire agreement, it simply cannot be stretched to immunize the defendants in this case.

Taylor v. Heckler

605 F. Supp. 407 · District Court, D. Maine · Aug 17, 1984

Saunders’ testimony establishes as much. *412 See Tr. at 38. 40-41. … Clearly, Dr. Kamm is entitled to interpret Dr. Saunders’ test results differently. Nor is Dr. Saunders’ opinion—that plaintiff is disabled—binding on the AU. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1527 . Dr.

Rowe v. Maine

324 F. Supp. 2d 238 · District Court, D. Maine · Jul 2, 2004

The Petitioner There is scant evidence to establish the Petitioner was mentally incapacitated *241 from understanding and acting to protect his legal rights from April 24,1996 to April 24, 1997. … Rowe did not clearly raise before Judge Kravchuk his claim that his mental incompetence should toll the statute of limitations.

United Paperworkers International Union, Local 14 v. International Paper Co.

777 F. Supp. 1010 · District Court, D. Maine · Nov 12, 1991

(“[P]laintiff has failed to establish any prejudice flowing from defendants’ noncompliance. … [W]ho established or maintain the plan, as well as ...

Lincoln Pulp & Paper Co., Inc. v. Dravo Corp.

445 F. Supp. 507 · District Court, D. Maine · Aug 11, 1977

Haddad, of B & W’s I &■ M Commercial Department, wrote Lipsey and instructed him to accept the Dravo purchase order as qualified by the conditions set forth in Haddad’s letter. … Under the Code no more is necessary to establish an agreement for the sale of goods. Continental-Wirt Electronics Corp. v.

United States v. Hussein

230 F. Supp. 2d 109 · District Court, D. Maine · Oct 31, 2002

Cheung, 836 F.2d 729, 731 (1st Cir.1988) (evidence need not establish defendant knew specific identity of the controlled substance); United States v. … The jury could also draw a negative inference from this qualified answer. 12 . There are cases where courts have found that knowledge of suspicious or illegal activity was not enough. See, e.g., United States v.

United States v. Williams

28 F. Cas. 678 · District Court, D. Maine · Feb 15, 1830

The question whether Swanton, after he was notified of his removal, and of the appointment of his successor, could legally act as collector until his successor was qualified and took possession of the office, and whether … And the intention of the collector to extinguish the rights of the United States, under the bond, appears to be clearly indicated by his subsequent conduct.

United States v. 15 of an Acre of Land

78 F. Supp. 956 · District Court, D. Maine · Jun 19, 1948

. * * * this could be more clearly demonstrated by the use of a map or plat made from actual measurements than by the mere parol statements of witnesses.” … That the United States Attorney adopted this position was evident from his statement that the road presently existing “is an old established road” (R. 128).

Kenney v. US Postal Service

298 F. Supp. 2d 139 · District Court, D. Maine · Jan 14, 2003

Once the moving party has made a preliminary showing that no genuine issue of material fact exists, the non-movant must “produce specific facts, in suitable evidentiary form, to establish the presence of a trialworthy issue … The court held that this information was reasonably discoverable at the time the claim was presented and thus did not qualify for the statutory exception. Id. at 350 .

Maine Central Railroad v. Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employes

663 F. Supp. 425 · District Court, D. Maine · Jun 3, 1987

The arbitrators also noted that “the seasoned, knowledgeable, and qualified public members of Presidential Emergency Board 209 were well aware that moratoriums have been part of national settlements for many, many years.” … The Court, therefore, concludes that the Award clearly determines the eligibility of the individual workers enumerated.

United States v. Reiner

397 F. Supp. 2d 101 · District Court, D. Maine · Oct 31, 2005

Clearly, therefore, the Club’s receipts for patrons with whom Morales illegally exchanged sex for money were “obtained by” Reiner. … Because of the number of transactions, Reiner does not qualify for this "narrow safe harbor,” id. 29 . I find by a preponderance of the evidence that Reiner joined the conspiracy well before January 4, 1999.

Inhabitants of City of Saco v. General Elec. Co.

779 F. Supp. 186 · District Court, D. Maine · Nov 15, 1991

Committee, the Cities of Biddeford and Saco, and the Maine Energy Recovery Company and that the Committee, through a competitive selection process, has selected Maine Energy Recovery Company as the business entity best qualified … Clearly, services are the predominant factor in this listing.

Joint Tribal Council of the Passamaquoddy Tribe v. Morton

388 F. Supp. 649 · District Court, D. Maine · Feb 11, 1975

The record before the Court clearly establishes, however, that the Attorney General relied exclusively on the recommendation of the Secretary in making his decision 17 and that the *665 actions of the Attorney General and … Clearly, the administrative determination made in response to this Court’s order of June 16, 1972, cannot so qualify. An administrative ruling which is no sooner made than challenged is not authoritative.

PARASKEVOPOULOS v. CENTRAL MAINE MEDICAL CENTER

District Court, D. Maine · Sep 25, 2019

Having established that Dr. Paraskevopoulos met his initial burden, the Magistrate Judge shifted the burden to CMMC to provide a non-discriminatory reason for its termination of Dr. … The Natofsky Court relied on the “established canon of construction that a specific provision ‘controls over one of more general application.’” Id. (quoting Gozlon-Peretz v.

United States v. Altieri

275 F. Supp. 2d 10 · District Court, D. Maine · Jul 31, 2003

The Government includes citations to cases that it contends show that a deferred adjudication in Texas qualifies as a conviction. The Government cites to United States v. … The judge in Defendant’s case was clearly dealing with Defendant's deferred adjudication and, therefore, clearly was proceeding under section 5.

LSP Transmission Holdings, LLC v. Lange

329 F. Supp. 3d 695 · District Court, D. Maine · Jun 21, 2017

Each ISO issues a tariff, which establishes the terms by which its members build and operate grids. ( Id. ¶ 15.) … In fact, the Complaint lists the sixteen entities that would qualify as *709 incumbents under Minn. Stat. § 216B.246, and five of those entities are headquartered outside of Minnesota. (Compl. ¶¶ 64-66; Doc.

Gammon v. CRISIS AND COUNSELING CENTERS, INC.

762 F. Supp. 2d 165 · District Court, D. Maine · Jan 19, 2011

Gammon argues that Crisis & Counseling “ignores the conflicting evidence which clearly establishes a direct link between [her] protected activity and the adverse action.” Id. … Most of Crisis & Counseling’s statements of fact are denied or qualified by Ms. Gammon. To determine whether specific statements in Ms.

FALLER v. TWO BRIDGES REGIONAL JAIL

District Court, D. Maine · Jul 29, 2022

Plaintiff’s Claims A plaintiff seeking relief under Title II of the ADA “must [first] establish . . . that [s]he is a qualified individual with a disability.” … A qualified individual with a disability must prove two additional elements to establish a Title II claim: “that [s]he was either excluded from participation in or denied the benefits of some public entity’s services