Case law

In re Steven L.

153 A.3d 764 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Jan 12, 2017

Findings supporting an order for involuntary admission to a progressive treatment program must be established by clear and convincing evidence. See Pitts v. … Licensed and qualified community providers are available to support the treatment plan; E. The patient is unlikely to follow the treatment plan voluntarily; F.

Reed v. Creamer

118 Me. 317 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Nov 18, 1919

Here however there are qualifying and explanatory words which modify and overrule the presumption of a fee. … case at bar, although, so far as the actual intent is concerned, the words of this will, giving only the use, improvement and income of the property instead of the property itself as in the Austin case, reveal far more clearly

Rush v. Buckley

70 L.R.A. 464 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Jun 19, 1905

The rule is well established that judges of courts of superior jurisdiction are not liable to civil actions for their judicial acts, even where such acts are in excess of their jurisdiction. … In that case it is said: “The constitution guarantees no man immunity from arrest. It guarantees him a fair and impartial trial.

Suzman v. Commissioner, Department of Health & Human Services

876 A.2d 29 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Jun 29, 2005

While Olmstead establishes that a state’s resource limitations must be taken into account, 527 U.S. at 587 , 119 S.Ct. 2176 , “budgetary constraints alone are insufficient to establish a fundamental alteration defense.” … We vacate agency factual findings only when they are clearly erroneous. Id. We uphold the agency’s findings if it “could have fairly and reasonably found the facts as it did.” Seider v.

WADSWORTH v. MSAD 40/RSU 40

District Court, D. Maine · Oct 2, 2020

He lays out the “two-pronged inquiry” courts use when analyzing qualified immunity, focusing on the “clearly established” prong, id. at 9-11 (quoting Tolan v. … “[T]he second, ‘clearly established’ step of the qualified immunity analysis . . ., in turn, has two aspects.” Id. at 269.

Poirier v. City of Saco

529 A.2d 329 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Jul 31, 1987

Beginning in 1979 or 1980 Poirier lived in a rough cabin he had built on property in Ward 2 on which he had established a sawmill and lumber company. … At the time in December 1985 when he was to take office, Poirier very clearly intended to return to 52 Cumberland Avenue when the renovations on that house were completed on the anticipated schedule in the fall of 1986.

State v. Navarro

621 A.2d 408 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Mar 2, 1993

The court’s finding of probable cause will not be set aside unless clearly erroneous. State v. Fogg, 410 A.2d 548, 550 (Me.1980). … Navarro filed a timely motion to have the State produce a qualified witness. The statutory language is clear.

Higgins v. TJX Companies, Inc.

331 F. Supp. 2d 3 · District Court, D. Maine · Aug 19, 2004

None of the paragraphs, however, admits, denies or qualifies A.J. … These allegations, even if proven, are not enough to establish an adverse employment action. Accordingly, A.J.

State v. Jobin

510 A.2d 527 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · May 29, 1986

Here, the State has steadfastly denied that Gilbert was given immunity from prosecution in exchange for furnishing evidence of narcotics trafficking. … The record clearly reflects that the jury was aware of the discrepancy, so the chemist’s testimony was not needed to establish its existence. M.R.Evid. 702; VII J. Wigmore, Evidence § 1923 (Chadbourne ed. 1978).

ME. ASS'N OF INTERDEPENDENT NEIGHBORHOODS v. Petit

659 F. Supp. 1309 · District Court, D. Maine · Apr 28, 1987

Although "[a] state waiver of sovereign immunity in its own courts does not necessarily imply waiver of its eleventh amendment immunity," Della Grotta v. … The Commissioner is clearly in a better position to do so. Finally, it does seem likely that Congress wished to avoid inconsistent results such as those feared by the Commissioner.

Austin W. Jones Co. v. State

122 Me. 214 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Feb 9, 1923

Two questions were presented in the case, one of which was the construction of an act in regard to the establishment of a general land office and the other was whether, under a given statute, the plaintiff's were qualified … Damages were also claimed for loss of profits in connection with an established milk route.

PUNSKY v. CITY OF PORTLAND

District Court, D. Maine · Nov 16, 2021

Qualified Immunity 1. … conduct was ‘clearly established at the time.’ ” District of Columbia v.

JOHNSON v. CITY OF BIDDEFORD POLICE DEPARTMENT

District Court, D. Maine · Mar 30, 2023

established prong of the qualified immunity analysis. … The Welch opinion specifically said that I could consider the clearly established prong of the qualified immunity test first. 12 F.4th at 77.

Myrick v. James

444 A.2d 987 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · May 4, 1982

In construing statutes, courts expound the law; they cannot extend their application, nor amend them by the insertion of qualifying conditions. See State v. Standard Oil Co., 131 Me. 63, 64 , 159 A. 116 (1932). … I view the doctrines of sovereign immunity, municipal immunity, parental immunity, in-terspousal immunity, attractive nuisance, the common law status distinctions between licensees and invitees, as wholly created by the court

State v. Weinschenk

868 A.2d 200 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Feb 15, 2005

Findings of fact are clearly erroneous only when no compe *205 tent evidence supporting the finding exists in the record. … P. 13(d), finding that sovereign immunity had not been waived. We need not address whether the Superior Court properly concluded that the counterclaim was barred by the doctrine of sovereign immunity.

GLADU v. MANNING

District Court, D. Maine · Mar 31, 2020

Government officers are entitled to qualified immunity unless they violate a constitutional right that was “clearly established” when they engaged in the conduct at issue. Hunt v. … In its qualified immunity analysis, in addition to determining whether the facts could support a finding of a constitutional violation, a court must assess “whether the violated right was clearly established at the time

State v. Hathaway

161 Me. 255 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Jun 25, 1965

In the judgment of that doctor a qualified psychiatrist the defendant had understood the instruction as to his rights and immunities. The defendant was a lad of some 13 years of age. … Defendant enjoyed an immunity from so doing. The defendant could have remained mute. He had been so advised by a lawyer, by the County Attorney and by the doctor.

American Trucking Associations, Inc. v. Quinn

437 A.2d 623 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Dec 1, 1981

Our Commerce Clause analysis of section 246-A is controlled by the clearly established rule that a state tax on interstate commerce will pass constitutional muster only if the tax “[1] is applied to an activity with a substantial … We need not address the Superior Court’s alternative holding that the tax also violates the Privileges and Immunities Clause.

Union Mutual Life Insurance Company v. Emerson

345 A.2d 504 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Oct 8, 1975

The common denominator of these establishments is the use of the elevators therein by the general public, the legislative concern being that such use be as safe as possible. … All parties have agreed that this person is a qualified “plant engineer” as that term is used in Section 439.

First Auburn Trust Co.

135 Me. 277 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Nov 13, 1937

Joseph Baker qualified as surviving partner and administered the partnership estate. … tends to establish it.”