Case law

Buchanan Ex Rel. Estate of Buchanan v. Maine

417 F. Supp. 2d 24 · District Court, D. Maine · Feb 16, 2006

Gilbert is shielded from liability under the doctrine of qualified immunity. This Court agrees with the State Defendants’ first contention. … Dec.1, 2005) (motion to dismiss) ("Our precedent clearly commands the conclusion that the State is not entitled to Eleventh Amendment immunity under Title II of the ADA”) (citing Dare v.

Nelson v. Maine Turnpike Authority

157 Me. 174 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Apr 24, 1961

It is of interest and significance that in many instances liability in tort of a Turnpike Authority or Agency is established by statute, or, stated differently, that there is express *182 waiver of governmental immunity to … Two justices in dissenting believed “that the question of abolishing governmental immunity is for the Legislature.” The problem is clearly set forth in the learned opinions of the Illinois and California Courts.

Jensen v. Augusta Mental Health Institute

574 A.2d 885 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · May 17, 1990

The only question before us is whether the Plaintiffs complaint alleges facts that fit her claims within the “Public Building” exception to the bar of governmental immunity that is established by 14 M.R.S.A. § 8104-A(2) ( … Noting that courts strictly construe any exception to governmental tort claims immunity, Clockedile v.

Gomes v. University of Maine System

304 F. Supp. 2d 117 · District Court, D. Maine · Feb 23, 2004

The individual Defendants have posited the affirmative defense of qualified immunity. … Individual defendants are entitled to qualified immunity for official action unless: (1) their conduct violated the Plaintiffs’ constitutional rights; and (2) the law to this effect was clearly established under then-existing

Kalloch v. Newbert

105 Me. 23 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Dec 22, 1908

The defendant was a deputy enforcement commissioner duly appointed and qualified under chapter 92, Public Laws of 1905. … There is nothing in the interstate commerce law that renders intoxicating liquors immune from seizure and we are aware of no decision that so holds.

Equifax Services, Inc. v. Cohen

420 A.2d 189 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Sep 9, 1980

Qualified Immunity. … furthered by the Federal Act’s grant of qualified immunity.

Clarke v. Blais

473 F. Supp. 2d 124 · District Court, D. Maine · Feb 12, 2007

immunity for the officers. … His sworn version of the events, if accepted as true, would foreclose qualified immunity.

Nader v. Maine Democratic Party

2012 Me. 57 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Apr 19, 2012

The Maine Constitution provides a right of redress through the courts for injuries, stating, “Every person, for an injury inflicted on the person or the person’s reputation, property or immunities, shall have remedy by due … “These fundamental rights are implicated most clearly where minor-party access to the ballot is restricted.”

Pelletier v. Magnusson

195 F. Supp. 2d 214 · District Court, D. Maine · Apr 16, 2002

Qualified Immunity Lipman, Stewart, and Bartlett (as well as the other State defendants) do assert that, even if there is a constitutional violation, they are entitled to qualified immunity. … “Qualified immunity protects state actors ‘from liability for civil damages inso *241 far as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known

City of South Portland v. State

476 A.2d 690 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Apr 30, 1984

immediately, upon the employment of such qualified public accountant file the name and address with the state department of audit, and such qualified public accountant shall, within 10 days after making the report of the … In the absence of a clearly expressed intent, we do not believe Congress in enacting the forerunner of section 1983 meant to create a new right in favor of a municipality. 13 .

Hoffman v. Connecticut

671 F. Supp. 2d 166 · District Court, D. Maine · Sep 18, 2009

that the constitutional right was clearly established such that a reasonable person in the position of the defendant Fitzsimmons (the sole individual defendant over whom there is personal jurisdiction in this matter), should … have known that his actions would violate such a right. 2 Qualified immunity, therefore, requires dismissal of Count II against the defendant Fitzsimmons, removing the federal claim from the lawsuit.

Rippett v. Bemis

672 A.2d 82 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Feb 16, 1996

On those claims for which Rippett is unable to establish a genuine issue of material fact as to an element, we review de novo the court’s decisions of law based on the established facts. Bliss v. … Stated affirmatively, a public official is entitled to qualified immunity if he can establish either that 1) he did not violate the plaintiffs constitutional rights; or 2) given the state of the law a reasonable official

Roy v. Correct Care Solutions, LLC

321 F. Supp. 3d 155 · District Court, D. Maine · Mar 30, 2018

A qualified immunity analysis consists of two parts: (1) whether Roy alleges facts that, if true, demonstrate violations of a constitutional right, and (2) whether that right was clearly established at the time of the alleged … So long as the defendant is "not contravening clearly established law, [the defendant is] entitled to qualified immunity." Taylor v.

Mueller v. Penobscot Valley Hospital

538 A.2d 294 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Mar 8, 1988

When viewed in its entirety, the Act clearly indicates that the Legislature intended its provisions to apply only to actions arising in tort. … shall be immune from suit on any and all claims seeking recovery of damages.”

Crosby v. Reynolds

763 F. Supp. 666 · District Court, D. Maine · May 6, 1991

On summary judgment, the judge appropriately may determine, not only the currently applicable law, but whether that law was clearly established at the time an action occurred. Harlow v. … I conclude, therefore, that the defendants are entitled to qualified immunity on the plaintiff’s charge that her constitutional right to privacy was invaded.

Bloomquist v. Albee

421 F. Supp. 2d 162 · District Court, D. Maine · Mar 9, 2006

immunity.”) … established by June 3, 2003.”

State v. Vickers

309 A.2d 324 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Sep 11, 1973

This power of government to compel persons to give testimonial evidence is firmly established in Anglo-American jurisprudence. Kastigar v. United States, supra. … We are clearly not confronted with such a situation in the present case. We shall withhold judgment on such a problem until we are faced with it. The entry will be Appeal denied.

Cousins v. Dole

674 F. Supp. 360 · District Court, D. Maine · Nov 18, 1987

Therefore, absent any express statutory waiver of governmental immunity, Plaintiffs claims for monetary relief are barred by principles of sovereign immunity. II. … Ash, 422 U.S. 66 , 95 S.Ct. 2080 , 45 L.Ed.2d 26 (1975), which established a four-part test for implying private rights of action under a federal statute. 7 The Cort test is applied “to help the courts decide what Congress

Roberts v. Stevens

17 L.R.A. 266 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Mar 10, 1892

The decision of two questions is involved : (1,) Does a proper construction of the will disclose the testator’s intention to secure to his son the life enjoyment of the income of a trust estate and its immunity from his son … Brown, 146 Mass. 369 , the court say that the provision securing the income of a trust against alienation, voluntary or involuntary is "sufficient if the intention is clearly gathered from the instrument when construed in

Otis Elevator Co. of Maine v. F.W. Cunningham & Sons

454 A.2d 335 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Jan 4, 1983

It concluded that the policies underlying interspousal immunity would not be frustrated by allowing contribution and, therefore, “[t]he equities clearly preponderate in favor of just contribution for the third party rather … than of undeserved immunity for the joint tort-fea-sor husband.”