Case law

Roberts v. State of Maine Department of Public Safety

Superior Court of Maine · Oct 4, 2023

Without particularized binding authority or a robust consensus of persuasive authority to clearly establish the right, Roberts has not overcome Thomas’s invocation of qualified immunity. … ). 26 Roberts has met neither requirement to show “clearly established law” for purposes of overcoming qualified immunity.

Pebbledene Trust v. Town of York

Superior Court of Maine · Jan 27, 2004

Ceccanti, then there is no qualified immunity for the individual defendants. … The law is clear that trespass, destruction of the property of another and assault are violations of clearly established constitutional rights.

Shulenburg v. Jamieson

Superior Court of Maine · Jun 13, 2018

The "clearly established" prong has two parts. … The Court cited numerous cases3 to support its conclusion that the "clearly established" prong of the qualified immunity test had been met in the circumstances presented that case, namely the arrest of a woman for a nonviolent

Cayer v. Town of Madawaska

Superior Court of Maine · Jan 11, 2022

under § 8103 of the MTCA, discretionary immunity under § 8104-B of the MTCA, and common law qualified immunity. … It is clearly established in the record that the Town is a governmental entity, Plaintiffs' abuse of process claims are tort claims, and that none of the exceptions to governmental immunity in§ 8104-A or the other sections

Leland v. State of Maine

Superior Court of Maine · Apr 6, 2001

violated that clearly established constitutional right. … Accordingly, the defendants‘ are entitled to qualified immunity as to Count I. B.

Clifford v. Maine General Medical Center

Superior Court of Maine · Jan 14, 2013

. §4682, insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known. Id at 1155. … Kemmerer may be entitled to qualified immunity However, whether or not qualified immunity is available within the Maine Civil Rights Act is a matter of fact based upon all of the circumstances.

Argereow v. Weisberg

Superior Court of Maine · Dec 21, 2017

Regarding § 2511(2), it is not clear that Mercy's participation clearly fits within this subsection either. … That case clearly holds that§ 2511 has no requirement that physicians must act without malice to be entitled to immunity. Strong, 2016 ME 60, ,r 12, 137 A.3d 1007. Even Lalonde v. Cent. Me. Med.

Brown v. Nortrax, Inc.

Superior Court of Maine · Mar 29, 2022

Moreover, MIA is clearly a prevailing party at this juncture because the Court entered summary judgment in MTA's favor on the issue of its immunity under the MICA, which bars the only claim and crossclaim against it. … To survive a motion for summary judgment, a plaintiff must establish a prima fade case for each element of his or her claims. Tri-Town Marine, Inc. v. J.C. Milliken Agency, Inc., 2007 ME 67, <j[ 7, 924 A.2d 1066.

Carey v. Maine Board of Overseers of the Bar

Superior Court of Maine · Jan 3, 2018

The Law Court's determinations of when certain actions qualify for the protections of discretionary immunity seemingly turn on the issue of whether the challenged actions "[were] associated with a plan or policy developed … Plaintiff has not established prima facie evidence showing that Dr.

Moore, Inc. v. City of Westbrook

Superior Court of Maine · Oct 8, 2009

Prot., a case that deals with qualified immunity, Moore asserts that absolute immunity only extends to damages, and does not apply to injunctive relief. 1998 ME 198, 716 A.2d 212. … A public official can claim qualified immunity when it can be established "that given the state of the law a reasonable official would not have understood that he [was violating the plaintiff's rights.]" Id.

Olfene v. Bd. of Trustees, Maine Pub. Employees Ret. Sys.

Superior Court of Maine · Dec 4, 2008

Clearly, prong one of the Metcalf & Eddy test weighs in favor of granting the System immunity. … Briggs, 475 U.S. 335, 341 (1986) (qualified immunity protects "all but the plainly incompetent or those who knowingly violate the law"). 7 The System is even more clearly an alter ego of the State for section 1983 purposes

Dineen v. Inhabs. of the town of Kittery

Superior Court of Maine · Oct 16, 2006

Eaton and the Town now move for summary judgment, claiming absolute immunity for the Town and discretionary function and/or qualified immunity for Eaton under the MTCA. … Although the language of this policy is not as explicit as the immunity language in Webb because it does not directly mention the MTCA, it does clearly indicate that the Town did not intend to waive the immunity to which

Pelletier v. Lewiston Auburn Water Pollution Control Authority

Superior Court of Maine · Jun 30, 2015

Qualified Immunity Defendants argue that, even if Mr. Pelletier has stated a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, Mr. Richardson and Ms. Asselin are nevertheless entitled to qualified immunity. … Government officials are entitled to qualified immunity, however, even if there has been a violation of a federal right, if the right was not "clearly established" at the time of the violation. Maldonado v.

Nightingale v. R.J. Grondin & Sons

Superior Court of Maine · Jan 6, 2017

Whether MDOT and the State of Maine are Immune Defendants argue that the State and MDOT are immune from liability for the reasons set forth in Paschal v. City ofBangor, 2000 ME 50, 747 A.2d 1194. … Peshkin is qualified to opine on the topic. His CV demonstrates a long and detailed knowledge of pavement research, evaluation, and design. Additionally, while Mr.

Eide v. Cumberland County

Superior Court of Maine · Mar 22, 2021

"A defendant who is the moving party has the initial burden to establish that there is no genuine dispute of fact and that the undisputed facts would entitle the defendant to judgement as a matter of law." … If a statute clearly indicates the duties of an employee, "the court construe[s] immunity in light of that statute. Id.

Golding v. Hi-Way Safety Systems, Inc.

Superior Court of Maine · Apr 15, 2020

The other purp01ts to be the original ­ although no foundation is offered as to who took the photo or how any print from a digital photograph can qualify as more original than any other. … Accordingly, it found that the City had established that the waiver of sovereign immunity in 14 M.R.S. § 8104-A(4) did not apply.

State of Maine v. Alexandre

Superior Court of Maine · Oct 4, 2016

Infante- Ruiz, 13 F.3d 498, 502 (1 51 Cir. 1994) ("It is now established that if the police have probable cause to believe that either a vehicle or a container within a vehicle contains contraband, evi ence of crime, or other … [T]he Act provides a limited immunity - not a shield from reasonable investigation. Id. at 310-11 (internal citations omitted). See also People v. Waxler, 168 Cal.

McIlwain v. Cumberland County Sheriff's Office

Superior Court of Maine · Oct 26, 2020

A party's opposing statement of material facts "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." Stanley v. … Therefore, the "public buildings" exception to immunity does not apply and Defendant is immune from liability.

Fiandaca v. City of Bangor

Superior Court of Maine · Jun 5, 2002

However, the scope of the school’s function clearly exceeds the playground’s, and the use of the playground presumably exceeds the school’s. … See 14 M.R.S.A. § 8104-B(3) (immunity for negligent performance of discretionary functions); Selby, 2002 ME 80, J 7, --- A.2d at --- (“An act qualifies as a discretionary function is the act is essential to the realization

Throumoulos v. State of Maine

Superior Court of Maine · May 15, 2007

, and qualified or absolute privilege, among others. … Facts asserted in a statement of material facts that are not appropriately denied or qualified are deemed admitted. M.R. Civ. P. 56(h)(4). 2.