Case law

Mexican Petroleum Corp. v. City of South Portland

121 Me. 128 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Feb 11, 1922

The importer can only deal with the goods as a whole, as an entity, if he wishes them to retain immunity. … This situation brings the case at bar clearly within the rule established by the Federal Court that while the payment of import duties gives the importer the right to bring his goods into this country, to sell them in the

Dunston v. Town of York

590 A.2d 526 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Apr 29, 1991

In this case the action authorized by the 1989 vote, the issuing of bonds for the construction of the school, clearly had been taken by the time the petition was submitted to the Town Clerk. … person who, under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage, or any State ... subjects or causes to be subjected, any citizen of the United States ... to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities

Knowlton v. Shaw

791 F. Supp. 2d 220 · District Court, D. Maine · Aug 24, 2011

Knowlton’s objection poses a puzzle: how a movant, who is attempting to establish the absence of a fact, cites the record to establish that certain evidence does not exist. … “This provision” clearly refers to paragraph fifty-one of the consent agreement. The Court also refuses to accept Mr.

PLOURDE v. CEJKA

District Court, D. Maine · Feb 1, 2022

Under the qualified immunity standards, the Defendants contend that “[t]he conduct alleged in Plaintiff’s Complaint does not violate clearly established law as of November 30, 2013.” Id. at 14. … “Qualified immunity is a doctrine that shelters government officials from civil damages liability ‘insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable

Charles W. Palian v. Department of Health and Human Services

242 A.3d 164 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Nov 10, 2020

P. 12(a)(2) (“A qualified Justice may participate in a decision even though not present at oral argument.”). 2 [¶2] We reject the bulk of Dr. … The Manual’s repeated references to “post-payment review” make clear that the mere payment of claims does not immunize payments from later review.10 Id. §§ 1.16, 1.18.

Harold MacQuinn, Inc. v. Halperin

415 A.2d 818 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Jun 11, 1980

It is not absurd to suggest that if lending qualifies as a kind of “use” that is subject to use taxation, it qualifies also as a use within the scope of the exemption provisions. … not clearly coming within the scope of the exemption provisions.

LODER v. MAINE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY

District Court, D. Maine · Mar 3, 2021

“The qualified immunity doctrine protects . . . … The qualified immunity inquiry involves a “two-part test: ‘(1) whether the facts alleged or shown by the plaintiff make out a violation of a constitutional right; and (2) if so, whether the right was clearly established

Maine Association 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.

Harding v. Murray

623 A.2d 172 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Apr 13, 1993

The Code, however, does not clearly establish when a right to payment arises. See In re Cumbustion Assocs. Inc., 67 B.R. 709, 712 (S.D.N.Y.1986) (citing In re M. … Murray specifically argues that the judgment clearly contravenes “the well established proposition that alimony must be reasonable in amount and in the method of payment giving regard for the situation, both at present and

Maine Ass'n of Independent Neighborhoods (M.A.I.N.) v. Commissioner, Maine Department of Human Services

697 F. Supp. 557 · District Court, D. Maine · Aug 30, 1988

Any expenditure of state funds would be ancillary to the grant of prospective relief, within the framework established by the Supreme Court. See Edelman v. … is not to be construed as a waiver of the state’s eleventh amendment immunity. 5 .

Guardianship of Hailey M.

140 A.3d 478 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · May 26, 2016

A finding of fact is clearly erroneous if there is no competent evidence in the record to support it, see Guardianship of Johnson, 2014 ME 104, ¶ 19, 98 A.3d 1023; if “the fact-finder clearly misapprehends the meaning … Therefore, the court did not abuse its discretion in deciding not to establish a transitional arrangement. 14 c.

Shaw v. Berry

31 Me. 478 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Jul 1, 1850

Proof that there was no negligence in the innkeeper or his servants, is not sufficient for his immunity. And herein no question arises in regard to the burden of proof. … If a lady were to leave a valuable shawl in her room, the innkeeper (though unacquainted with its value) would clearly be responsible for it, if lost. Richmond v.

Benner v. St. Paul Pub. Sch.

380 F. Supp. 3d 869 · District Court, D. Maine · May 3, 2019

Gruenewald's Qualified Immunity Defense With respect to Principal Gruenewald - the "individual defendant" - Defendants argue that, because there is no "clearly established legal right to be free from investigations and write-ups … circumstances was clearly established").

Baker v. Charles

919 F. Supp. 41 · District Court, D. Maine · Feb 16, 1996

I turn therefore to explore what qualified privilege may be available under Maine common law. … The latter two options sound much like a negligence standard, whereas the "actual malice” of New York Times clearly requires at least reckless disregard or its equivalent.

In Re Grand Jury Subpoenas Duces Tecum Dated January 30, 1986

638 F. Supp. 794 · District Court, D. Maine · Jun 19, 1986

Thus, any psychotherapist-patient privilege clearly would not apply to many of the subpoenaed documents. Nevertheless, movant’s challenge is directed to all items sought. … Thus, the Sixth and Eighth Circuits, though not requiring a grant of immunity prior to the production of corporate records by an individual custodian, would limit the risk of production with the promise of de facto use immunity

State v. Cookson

837 A.2d 101 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Dec 1, 2003

In addition, Cookson has not proven clearly and convincingly that the discovery of the murder weapon would have changed the outcome of the trial. … In some of our cases reviewing a trial court’s determination that an expert witness is or is not qualified, we have said that the standard of review is whether the court clearly erred. See, e.g., Marchesseault v.

Aroostook Band of Micmacs v. Ryan

403 F. Supp. 2d 114 · District Court, D. Maine · Dec 5, 2005

A tribe’s power to “maintain or establish its own form of government .... is the first element of sovereignty.” [S. Cohen,] Handbook of Federal Indian Law, [,] 247 [ (1982 ed.) ]. … Even assuming that the EEOC immediately agrees with the Band and dismisses each case, repeatedly forcing the Band to defend obviously futile Title VII complaints makes it incur financial costs that qualify as a cognizable

WOODS v. BARNIES

District Court, D. Maine · Oct 2, 2023

“The qualified immunity analysis has two facets: the court must determine whether the defendant violated the plaintiff’s constitutional rights and then must determine whether the allegedly abridged right was clearly established … Because the law was not clearly established at the time of Plaintiff’s arrest, Defendant is entitled to qualified immunity on the unlawful entry claim. 3.

GRAY v. GOVERNOR JANET T MILLS

District Court, D. Maine · Nov 5, 2021

Government officials sued in their individual capacities “are immune from damages claims unless (1) they violated a federal statutory or constitutional right, and (2) the unlawfulness of their conduct was ‘clearly established … Ct. at 589 (law must be clearly established “at the time” of alleged violation) (quoting Reichle, 566 U.S. at 664).

FOX v. MAKIN

District Court, D. Maine · Feb 22, 2024

certain non-religious exemptions would violate a religious objector’s constitutional rights was not clearly established law at the time of the school district’s decision. … Lenea tries to circumvent defendants’ qualified immunity by arguing that backpay is more in the nature of equitable relief, and hence not barred by qualified immunity.