Case law

CASSETTA v. SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION COMMISSIONER

District Court, D. Maine · Jul 1, 2024

The ALJ has the authority to establish and enforce a reasonable deadline for the post-hearing submission of vocational evidence. The deadline was clearly established and understood by Plaintiff’s counsel. … In fact, as Plaintiff notes, Social Security Administration policy acknowledges that evidence related to ongoing treatment would likely qualify as an exception to the rule.

FRIEDMAN v. CENTRAL MAINE POWER COMPANY

District Court, D. Maine · Feb 21, 2025

Each such statement shall begin with the designation “Admitted,” “Denied,” or “Qualified” and, in the case of an admission, shall end with such designation. … Carpenter does not know the level of RF exposure where there is a clearly defined adverse human health effect (Id.

United States v. Stevens

598 F. Supp. 2d 133 · District Court, D. Maine · Feb 19, 2009

The Court finds that the Government has established beyond a reasonable doubt that Mr. Stevens is a sex offender who is required to register under SORNA. 2. Mr. … By finding that the Government failed to establish that Mr.

United States v. Hartsock

253 F. Supp. 2d 24 · District Court, D. Maine · Mar 19, 2003

If he were to do so, established precedent would clearly place the burden of production on him. On this point, and perhaps on this point alone, I agree with the Bethurum court. … Such an approach simply does not comport with established Supreme Court precedent and other statutory provisions.

Strickland v. COM'R ME. HUMAN SERVICES

921 F. Supp. 21 · District Court, D. Maine · Apr 8, 1996

The legislative history suggesting that depreciation be eliminated, even if not binding on the agency, manifestly qualifies as [sic] good reason for the agency to change its views. Id. at 19 (emphases added). … At a minimum the contradictory legislative history is insufficient to establish a clear Congressional intent to override the discretion conferred on the Secretary by the ambiguous statutory language.

Beacon Investments LLC v. Mainepcs, LLC

468 B.R. 1 · District Court, D. Maine · Mar 28, 2012

In short, the Court does not accept Beacon’s contention that the record in this case establishes that Mr. … In short, the Court does not accept that the record in this case establishes Beacon’s main contention that Mr.

FAMILY PLANNING ASSOCIATION OF MAINE v. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

District Court, D. Maine · Jun 9, 2020

As I explained in the Decision and Order on the preliminary injunction motion, the history of Title X regulation permits a line of demarcation between counseling and referrals and Congress has not clearly overridden the … Nor is the doctor-patient relationship established by the Title X program sufficiently all encompassing so as to justify an expectation on the part of the patient of comprehensive medical advice.

HOWE

District Court, D. Maine · Sep 15, 2026

Accordingly, MFRA qualifies as a debt collector under the FDCPA’s principal-purpose definition. … For MFRA to now argue it can establish standing to foreclose through the loan modification agreement: (1) is “clearly inconsistent” with the position it took in the Florida Receivership Action; (2) creates “the perception

Nulankeyutmonen Nkihtaqmikon v. Impson

462 F. Supp. 2d 86 · District Court, D. Maine · Nov 16, 2006

The burden falls on the plaintiff “clearly to allege facts demonstrating that he is a proper party to invoke federal jurisdiction.” Dubois v. … APA Defendants’ final argument is that the APA claim must fail as Plaintiffs’ other statutory claims warrant dismissal and the APA “provides the waiver of sovereign immunity for Plaintiffs to bring their challenge to BIA’

Pennsylvania Co. v. United Railways of Havana

26 F. Supp. 379 · District Court, D. Maine · Feb 8, 1939

At this point it is necessary to mpre clearly distinguish between ownership of a share in a corporation and the evidence of such ownership, referred to as the certificate of stock. … This is well established by the Maine cases cited by the defendant. In Crooker v.

Bonney v. Canadian National Railway Co.

613 F. Supp. 997 · District Court, D. Maine · Jul 18, 1985

Pedestrian use of the bridge clearly was not sporadic or unusual. A daily flow of pedestrians has crossed the bridge for decades. The bridge clearly was and is unsafe for pedestrian use. Deposition of Sweeney at 58, 79. … The Court admits to some difficulty in electing between the methods used by two qualified and reputable economists, each of whom once used the other’s method.

BROWN v. RIEGER

District Court, D. Maine · Nov 18, 2022

The Court determined that Petitioner had not carried her burden to establish that she was entitled to those forms of extraordinary relief. … “[W]here Congress has not clearly required exhaustion,” issues of federal administrative exhaustion requirements are governed by “sound judicial discretion,” McCarthy v.

Freeport Transit, Inc. v. McNulty

239 F. Supp. 2d 102 · District Court, D. Maine · Feb 3, 2003

Under the regulations, Freeport Transit and RTP qualify as “full service transportation providers.” … Finally, a RICO *110 claimant must establish a causal relationship between the pattern of racketeering activity and his asserted injury.

In re New Motor Vehicles Canadian Export Antitrust Litigation

235 F.R.D. 127 · District Court, D. Maine · May 12, 2006

Thus the exemplar classes qualify for certification under the standards of Rule 23. … Erwin Chemerinsky, Federal Jurisdiction § 5.3, at 317-18 (4th ed.2003) ("[I]t is now clearly established that the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure ... are to be applied by the federal court [in diversity cases], even if there

Plixer Int'l, Inc. v. Scrutinizer GMBH

293 F. Supp. 3d 232 · District Court, D. Maine · Oct 18, 2017

Elements that Establish Specific Jurisdiction Under the Federal Long-Arm Statute The plaintiff seeks to support specific jurisdiction over the German defendant under Fed. R. Civ. … Denckla , 357 U.S. 235 , 251, 78 S.Ct. 1228 , 2 L.Ed.2d 1283 (1958) : "Those restrictions [on personal jurisdiction] are more than a guarantee of immunity from inconvenient or distant litigation.

FREY

District Court, D. Maine · Jul 27, 2026

Among other provisions, the statute establishes a formula for calculating ceiling prices, id. § 256b(a)(2), defines covered drugs, id. § 256b(a)(3), (b)(2), and lists the types of healthcare facilities qualifying as covered … the case for federal preemption is less persuasive and difficult to establish”) (quotation marks omitted).

NEW HAMPSHIRE MOTOR TRANSPORT ASS'N v. Rowe

377 F. Supp. 2d 197 · District Court, D. Maine · May 27, 2005

The Attorney General qualifies and moves to strike all of these paragraphs. Def.'s Responsive SMF ¶¶ 100-158. I consider these state statutes as relevant law, not facts. 32 . … minimum, on the same plane as die shipping label, and must show that tobacco products are inside and list the retailer's name and Maine license number) and Nev. *205 Rev.Stat. § 202.24935(3) (packaging or wrapping must be clearly

Wuori v. Concannon

551 F. Supp. 185 · District Court, D. Maine · Aug 6, 1982

With limited exceptions, the services performed by plaintiffs’ attorneys during the periods covered by the present motions clearly fall within the rule of the above cases: A. … The record establishes beyond contravention that the efforts of plaintiffs’ counsel were a “necessary and important factor,” Nadeau v.

Mci Commc'ns, Inc. v. Maverick Cutting & Breaking LLC

374 F. Supp. 3d 789 · District Court, D. Maine · Mar 12, 2019

Pictures provided clearly show dirt under the concrete. Because concrete depths vary on sites, there is little doubt that the blade was moving dirt at points during the operation.... 6. … Second, the proposed witness must be qualified to assist the finder of fact.

DENBOW v. MAINE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS

District Court, D. Maine · Jun 8, 2020

Petitioners state that Maine’s prisons qualify as “public entit[ies]” within the meaning of 42 U.S.C. § 12132, and thus are prohibited from “discriminating against a qualified individual with a disability on the basis of … For Petitioners to successfully make out a claim against a public entity under the ADA and Rehabilitation Act, they must establish: (1) that [they are] qualified individual[s] with a disability