Case law

Opinions from 1658 to today.

FiltersME

9,550 results

2.51s

  • Bureau of Taxation v. Town of Washburn

    490 A.2d 1182 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Apr 5, 1985

    Rice v. Amerling, 433 A.2d 388 , 388 n. 1 (Me.1981); see Town of Boothbay Harbor v. Russell, 410 A.2d 554, 560-61 (Me.1980). … See Sewall v. Spinney Creek Oyster Co., Inc., 421 A.2d 36, 38 (Me.1980); State v. Maine Labor *1185 Relations Board, 413 A.2d 510, 512-13 (Me.1980).

    Cited 5 timesPublished
  • Cote v. City of Biddeford

    96 Me. 491 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Jul 15, 1902

    The plaintiff' had been elected to the office just prior to the time when the act creating the board of police went into effeet and he could only be removed for cause. Andrews v. Police Board of Biddeford, 94 Maine, 68. … A portion of the language of the opinion of the court in the case of Phillips v.

    Cited 6 timesPublished
  • Regional School Unit No. 5 v. The Coastal Education Association

    121 A.3d 98 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Jul 30, 2015

    Comm. v. … Comm. v.

    Cited 3 timesPublished
  • Stephen Doane v. Department of Health and Human Services

    170 A.3d 269 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Sep 12, 2017

    See Grant v. Foster Wheeler, LLC, 2016 ME 85, ¶ 2 , 140 A.3d 1242 . Stephen Doane is a physician licensed to practice in Maine by the Board of Licensure in Medicine. … State v. Pelletier, 2015 ME 129, ¶ 7 , 125 A.3d 354 (quoting Hendrick v.

    Cited 10 timesPublished
  • Mushero v. Lincoln Pulp & Paper Co.

    683 A.2d 504 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Oct 9, 1996

    Brackett v. A.C. Lawrence Leather Co., 559 A.2d 776, 777-79 (Me.1989); Richardson v. Robbins Lumber, Inc., 379 A.2d 380, 383 (Me.1977). … Decisions of the Board interpreting the Workers’ Compensation Act are entitled to deference. Curtis v. National Sea Prods., 657 A.2d 320, 322 (Me.1995); LaRochelle v. Crest Shoe Co., 655 A.2d 1245, 1248 (Me.1995).

    Cited 4 timesPublished
  • Vitorino America v. Sunspray Condominium Association

    61 A.3d 1249 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Feb 12, 2013

    II Ass’n v. … Gray v.

    Cited 35 timesPublished
  • Bay Ferries, LTD. v. Board of Commissioners for the Port of Portland

    Superior Court of Maine · Jun 1, 2018

    The Board has a duty to determine that the pilotage rate is neither unreasonably low nor unreasonably high. See Indus. Energy Consumer Grp. v. Public Utils. … While the Pilots are correct that the Board is entitled to a presumption of regularity, see Conservation Law Found v. Dep 't ofEnvtl.

    Cited 0 timesUnpublished
  • Ray v. Carland Construction, Inc.

    703 A.2d 648 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Oct 23, 1997

    We vacate the decision of the Board in Ray, and affirm in part 1 the Board’s decision in Pelletier. Ray v. Carland Construction, Inc. [¶ 2] Donald P. … We conclude, therefore, that the Board erred by applying the inflation adjustment in this case. Pelletier v.

    Cited 10 timesPublished
  • State v. Maine State Employees Ass'n

    443 A.2d 948 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Apr 6, 1982

    Thus, as we give these words of limitation their plain and ordinary meaning, see Paradis v. … See State v. Maine Labor Relations Board, Me., 413 A.2d 510, 512-13 (1980). Such participation, however, should not be routine or automatic. See id. at 513 .

    Cited 3 timesPublished
  • Colby v. Board of Trustees for the Maine Publice Employees Retirement System

    Superior Court of Maine · Aug 31, 2018

    State v. Nisbet, 2018 ME 113, ! … Anderson v. Me. Pub. Emples. Ret. Sys., 2009 ME 134, ~ 3,985 A.2d 501; see also Mehlhorn v.

    Cited 0 timesUnpublished
  • Hincks v. Robert Mitchell Co.

    740 A.2d 992 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Nov 24, 1999

    Finally, relying on Ashby v. … See Ciampi v. Hannaford Bros. Co., 681 A.2d 4, 9 (Me.1996); Tompkins v. Wade & Searway Constr.

    Cited 7 timesPublished
  • Thacher Hotel, Inc. v. Economos

    160 Me. 22 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Feb 4, 1964

    The following cases in which no recovery was allowed illustrate the principle: Brown v. … Randall v. Tuell, 89 Me. 443 , 36 A. 910 (innkeeper); Black v. Mutual Life Asso., 95 Me. 35 , 49 A. 51 (insurance agent); Harding v. Hagar, 60 Me. 340 (freight).

    Cited 16 timesPublished
  • State v. Horton

    561 A.2d 488 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Jul 12, 1989

    See Baxter v. Palmigiano, 425 U.S. 308, 318 , 96 S.Ct. 1551, 1557 , 47 L.Ed.2d 810 (1976); Board of Overseers of the Bar v. Dineen, 481 A.2d 499, 503 (Me.1984). … Board of Overseers of the Bar v. Horton, No. Bar-88-15 (filed Nov. 2, 1988). .That situation should be distinguished from a case such as Board of Overseers of the Bar v.

    Cited 4 timesPublished
  • Burr v. Town of Rangeley

    549 A.2d 733 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Oct 21, 1988

    On the basis of Ballard v. City of Westbrook, 502 A.2d 476, 480 (Me.1985), the Board correctly determined that it is not authorized to extend an approved plan that has become null and void. … (“[Tjhe mere fact that a municipal board zigged when it should have zagged, without more, will not serve to engage the heavy-duty machinery of the Civil Rights Acts.”); Creative Environments, Inc. v.

    Cited 9 timesPublished
  • Priestly v. Town of Hermon

    814 A.2d 995 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Jan 22, 2003

    Gerald v. … Banks v. Maine RSA # 1, 1998 ME 272, ¶ 4 , 721 A.2d 655, 657 .

    Cited 22 timesPublished
  • Connecticut Bank & Trust Co. v. City of Westbrook

    477 A.2d 269 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · May 30, 1984

    In Statler Industries, Inc. v. … Shawmut Inn v.

    Cited 10 timesPublished
  • Goldstein v. City of South Portland

    728 A.2d 164 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Apr 27, 1999

    Leadbetter v. … See Leadbetter, 485 A.2d at 227-28 ; see also Anderson v.

    Cited 5 timesPublished
  • Stevens v. Board of Trustees for the Maine Public Employees Retirement System

    Superior Court of Maine · Apr 11, 2018

    the Board's findings." … Petitioner had the burden of persuading the Board by a preponderance of the evidence that he was disabled within the meaning of the statute. See Douglas v. Bd ofTrs., 669 A.2d 177, 179 (Me. 1996).

    Cited 0 timesUnpublished
  • Polk v. Town of Lubec

    756 A.2d 510 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Aug 8, 2000

    Halpin, 953 F.2d 689, 711 (1st Cir.1991) (quoting Wayte v. … Nason, Inc. v. Land-Ho Dev. Corp., 403 A.2d 1173, 1177 (Me.1979). We review the court’s conclusion that Polk did not adequately plead a due process claim de novo. See Bowen v.

    Cited 28 timesPublished
  • Baker Bus Service v. Keith

    428 A.2d 55 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Apr 6, 1981

    In Baker Bus Service v. … See Sanford Highway Unit of Local 481 v. Town of Sanford, Me., 411 A.2d 1010 (1980); Caribou School Dept. v. Caribou Teachers Ass’n, Me., 402 A.2d 1279 (1979).

    Cited 3 timesPublished

Ask Donna

Ask Donna

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.