Case law

Parsons v. Chasse

159 Me. 463 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Nov 21, 1963

If such were the situation plaintiff might have requested of the Board the restoration to him of his certificate or a duplicate thereof and for refusal or neglect have invoked mandamus. Steves v. … Baker v. Johnson, 41 Me. 15, 20 .

Kennebec County v. Maine Public Employees Retirement System

86 A.3d 1204 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Feb 20, 2014

See Aydelott v. … See McPhee v. Me. State Ret.

Nichols v. Cantara & Sons

659 A.2d 258 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Feb 15, 1995

The Board’s “expertise is limited to the Maine Workers’ Compensation Act,” LeBlanc v. … The entry is: The decision of the Workers’ Compensation Board in Nichols v. Cantara & Sons, WCB-93-262 is affirmed. The decision of the Workers’ Compensation Board in Mooers v. Augusta Auto Mall, WCB-93-837 is vacated.

Shawn A. Grant v. Town of Belgrade

2019 ME 160 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Dec 5, 2019

Gensheimer v. … Town of Minot v.

Langley v. Maine State Employees Ass'n

791 A.2d 100 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Feb 22, 2002

Standard of Review [¶ 8] We review the Board’s decision directly for an abuse of discretion, an error of law, or findings not supported by the evidence. Biddeford Bd. of Educ. v. … The Board is accorded considerable deference in construing the statutes it is charged with enforcing. Minot Sch. Comm. v. Minot Ed. Ass’n, 1998 ME 211, ¶ 6 , 717 A.2d 372, 375 . B.

City of Auburn v. Paul

110 Me. 192 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Dec 30, 1912

In Wandworth Board of Public Works v. Telephone Co., L. R., 13, Q. D., 904, Bowen L. … In Paine v.

Nichols v. City of Rockland

324 A.2d 295 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Aug 5, 1974

Co. v. … See Chapman v. City of Portland, 131 Me. 242 , 160 A. 913 (1932). At oral argument a question arose as to whether the recent case of State Board of Education v.

Kittery Water District v. Town of York

489 A.2d 1091 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Mar 27, 1985

When, as here, the Superior Court acts as an intermediate appellate court reviewing the action of the Board of Appeals, we examine directly the record as it developed before that Board. See Lakes Environmental Ass’n v. … Town of Naples, 486 A.2d 91, 94 (Me.1984); Driscoll v. Gheewalla, 441 A.2d 1023, 1026 (Me.1982).

Moreau v. Town of Turner

661 A.2d 677 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Jul 18, 1995

Gregory v. Town of Pittsfield, 479 A.2d 1304, 1308 (Me.1984); Jackson v. Town of Searsport, 456 A.2d 852, 858-59 (Me.1983); see Parratt v. … Relying on Mercier v.

Fitanides v. City of Saco

684 A.2d 421 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Oct 30, 1996

Enos v. Town of Stetson, 665 A.2d 678, 680 (Me.1995) (citing Buker v. Town of Sweden, 644 A.2d 1042, 1043 (Me.1994)). … Not counting Spiers’s vote, there were three affirmative votes in favor of the findings of fact made by the Board. See Murach v.

Senders v. Town of Columbia Falls

647 A.2d 93 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Sep 6, 1994

We review directly the record before the board to determine if the board abused its discretion, committed an error of law, or made findings not supported by substantial evidence. Boisvert v. … We affirm the board’s decision unless it is unlawful, arbitrary, capricious, or unreasonable. Mason v. Crooker-Mulligan, 570 A.2d 1217, 1220 (Me.1990).

Gay v. Gay's Super Markets, Inc.

343 A.2d 577 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Aug 13, 1975

At the time of the corporate action of which the plaintiff complains, the defendant, Carroll V. Gay, was president, general manager and one of three members of the board of directors of Gay’s Super Markets, Inc. … Leighton v. Leighton, 1974, Me., 329 A.2d 164, 166 ; City of South Portland v. Pine State By-Products, Inc., 1973, 306 A.2d 1, 4 ; Ray v. Lyford, 1958, 153 Me. 408, 409 , 140 A.2d 749, 750, 751 . See also Strater v.

State v. Stinson Canning Company

161 Me. 320 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Jul 9, 1965

Laughlin v. City of Portland, 111 Me. 486, 489 . *323 See Morris v. Goss, 147 Me. 89 ; Crommett v. City of Portland, 150 Me. 217 ; State v. The Fantastic Fair, et al., 158 Me. 450 . … Brown v. Russell, 166 Mass. 14, 25 .

Lesieur v. Inhabitants of Rumford

113 Me. 317 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Apr 20, 1915

Eden v. Southwest Harbor, 108 Maine, 489. … In Gaw v.

SUZMAN v. Crisp

489 F. Supp. 2d 103 · District Court, D. Maine · May 31, 2007

Jourdain v. Dineen, 527 A.2d 1304, 1307 (Me.1987) (quoting Letellier v. Small, 400 A.2d 371, 376 (Me.1979)). … In Forrest Associates v.

Lakeside at Pleasant Mountain Condominium Ass'n v. Town of Bridgton

974 A.2d 893 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Jul 7, 2009

Here, in considering Lakeside’s appeal of the CEO’s decision, the Board held a hearing, took testimony, and conducted a de novo review; therefore, we review its decision directly. See Yates v. Town of Sw. … Because Shawnee Peak and the Town did not raise these issues before the Board, the issues are unpreserved and we do not address them. See Save Our Sebasticook, Inc. v. Bd. of Envtl.

Wright v. Department of Defense & Veterans Services

623 A.2d 1283 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Apr 26, 1993

The New York Court of Appeals, in Jones v. … Wright v. Park, 811 F.Supp. 726 (D.Me.1993).

Gagne v. Cianbro Corp.

431 A.2d 1313 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Jul 13, 1981

In Gagne v. … Benedix v. Boston Old Colony Insurance Co., Me., 417 A.2d 453, 455 (1980), citing, Cardinali v. Planning Board of Lebanon, Me., 373 A.2d 251, 255 (1977).

Peterson v. Town of Rangeley

715 A.2d 930 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Jul 29, 1998

to the request granted by the Board in 1992. [¶11] In Town of North Berwick v. … Accordingly, the Board has the authority to grant such a variance. See Cope v.

WLH Management Corp. v. Town of Kittery

639 A.2d 108 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Mar 31, 1994

Town of Vienna v. Kokernak, 612 A.2d 870, 872 (Me.1992). The board erred in each of its conclusions. First, the board concluded that section 8.17(d) prohibited the canopy. … Plummer Co. v. Town of Cape Elizabeth, 612 A.2d 856, 859-60 (Me.1992) (ordinance may not be applied in an arbitrary and capricious manner); see also Restivo v. Princeton Constr.