Case law

Hooper v. Goodwin

48 Me. 79 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Jul 1, 1861

H., 290; People v. Collins, 5 Johns., 549 ; Norwich v. Yarrington, 20 Vermont, 473. In People v. … Brown v. Bunt, 31 Maine, 423. His official acts are valid as to third persons, till his commission has been judicially determined to be null and void.

State v. Darling

393 A.2d 530 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Nov 8, 1978

Applying the principles announced in Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 , 88 S.Ct. 1868 , 20 L.Ed.2d 889 (1968), we sustain the State’s appeal. … Commonwealth v. Almeida, Mass., 366 N.E.2d 756, 760 (1977). Accord, State v. Brown, 160 N.J.Super. 227 , 389 A.2d 507 (1978); Brown v. State, 358 So.2d 596 (Fla.App.1978); State v.

United States v. Thurston

774 F. Supp. 666 · District Court, D. Maine · Oct 3, 1991

In addition, at the time Sergeant Willis and Corporal Brown entered the trailer they were unsure whether the Defendant was alone. … United States v. Doe, 878 F.2d 1546, 1552 (1st Cir.1989) (quoting New York v. Quarles, 467 U.S. at 656, n. 8 , 104 S.Ct. at 2633, n. 8 ).

Burkett v. Trowbridge

61 Me. 251 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Jul 1, 1871

Mayhew v. Thayer, 8 Gray, 175 , and authorities there cited. A promise is implied, then, in a case of this description, unless there is something in the evidence to show an understanding that the board was a gratuity. … Hancock v. Merrick, 10 Cush. 41 ; Burlen v. Shannon, 14 Gray, 434 ; Bowe v. Smith, 11 Allen, 107 . Judgment for plaintiff for $114.00 and interest from the date of the writ.

Pocahontas Terminal Corp. v. Portland Building & Construction Trade Council

93 F. Supp. 217 · District Court, D. Maine · Sep 21, 1950

Polish Alliance v. National Labor Board, 1944, 322 U.S. 643, 650 , 64 S.Ct. 1196, 1200 , 88 L.Ed. 1509 . … National Labor Relations Board, 2 Cir., 1950, 181 F.2d 34 ; Shore v. Building *222 and Construction Trades Council, 3 Cir., 1949, 173 F.2d 678 , 8 A.L.R.2d 731 ; Slater v.

Adams v. Maine Bd.of Soc. Worker Licensure

Superior Court of Maine · Feb 23, 2004

ADAMS, Petitioner v. … We now state expressly that the Act’s time limitations are jurisdictional, Brown v. State Department of Manpower Affairs, 426 A.2d 880, 887-888 (Me. 1981). The motion to dismiss must be granted.

Town of Holden v. Pineau

573 A.2d 1310 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Apr 20, 1990

V. … Colony Cadillac & Oldsmobile, Inc. v.

City of Auburn v. Desgrosseilliers

578 A.2d 712 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Jul 16, 1990

In Shackforth & Gooch, Inc. v. … Leadbetter v. Morse, 510 A.2d 524, 526 (Me.1986); Dunning v. Dunning, 495 A.2d 821, 823 (Me.1985); Harmon v. Emerson, 425 A.2d 978, 981-82 (Me.1981).

Thompson v. Winslow

130 F. 1001 · District Court, D. Maine · Jul 5, 1904

In The Rebecca v. The America, Fed. Cas. … But the Marjory Brown was engaged in commercial business.

Gatherer v. West

126 Me. 566 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Feb 9, 1928

Sampson v. Alexander, 66 Me., 182; 30 C. J. 826. Having given the jury the law, as provided in Sec. 3, Chap. 66 R. … Stratton v. Bailey, 80 Me., 345. She further testified that it was expressly agreed between her and her husband that for such additional services she was entitled to the compensation.

Lunn v. City of Auburn

110 Me. 241 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Feb 17, 1913

Carrigan v. Stillwell, 99 Maine, 434; Orono v. B. R. & E. Co., 105 Maine, 428. To do this these two sections must be considered together. What did the Legislature intend by the reservation? … , and confer their duties upon a promiscuous board?

Pelletier v. Maine Principals' Ass'n

261 F. Supp. 2d 10 · District Court, D. Maine · May 9, 2003

Brown v. … In Brown v.

Hare v. Town of Buxton

Superior Court of Maine · Aug 8, 2003

Truman v. Brown, 2001 Me. 18, 788 A.2d 168. Here, there is no contractual or statutory basis for an award of attorney fees and the Town has not engaged in misconduct in the judicial proceeding. Rather, Mr. … See, South Portland Civil Service Commission, et al. v. City of South Portland, et al., 667 A.2d 599 (Me. 1995).

City of Biddeford v. Yates

104 Me. 506 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Dec 14, 1908

As was said in Collins v. Holyoke, supra: "The membership of the defendant board is not the same as when the assessment in question was made. … But while its members change from time to time, the Board itself as a tribunal is continuously the same.” See also Fairbanks v. Fitchburg, 132 Mass. 42 .

Lamphier v. Bath Iron Works Corp.

2000 Me. 121 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Jun 27, 2000

Relying on Adams v. Ml. … See Ibbitson v. Sheridan Corp., 422 A.2d 1005, 1009 (Me.1980).

United States v. Waterborough

28 F. Cas. 417 · District Court, D. Maine · Sep 15, 1841

Buffington v. Gerrish, 15 Mass. 156 . … Susannah Brown.

Construction Services Workers' Compensation Group Self Insurance Trust v. Stevens

8 A.3d 688 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Oct 26, 2010

See Nichols v. Cantara & Sons, 659 A.2d 258, 260-61 (Me.1995); Dionne v. Libbey-Owens Ford Co., 621 A.2d 414, 417-18 (Me.1993). … Bank, FSB v.

Lisbon School Committee v. Lisbon Education Ass'n

438 A.2d 239 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Dec 10, 1981

Board of School Directors, Maine School Administrative District No. 52 v. Tri-Town Teachers Association, Me., 412 A.2d 990, 992-93 (1980). … Compare School Committee of Danvers v. Tyman, 372 Mass. 106, 110 , 360 N.E.2d 877, 881 (1977) with Illinois Education Ass’n v. Board of Education, 62 Ill.2d 127, 129 , 340 N.E.2d 7, 9 (1975).

Inhabitants of Webster v. Sanborn

47 Me. 471 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Jul 1, 1859

The Act of 1856, c. 255, authorized towns by their selectmen, &c., to dispose of such liquors as they then had on hand to persons authorized by the Act to sell, v provided such liquors were thus disposed of within sixty days … It did not, in any case, authorize towns to enter into a general traffic in intoxicating liquors through their licensing boards or otherwise.

State v. Cook

2 A.3d 313 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Aug 19, 2010

Brown, 2000 ME 25, ¶ 15 , 757 A.2d at 772 (alteration in original) (quotation marks omitted). … State v.