Case law

Howe v. Huntington

15 Me. 350 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Apr 15, 1839

Muilman v. DeEuguino, 2 H. Bl. 565; Fry v. Hill, 7 Taunt. 397; Wallace v. Agry, 4 Mason, 344 . … Tindale v. Brown, 1 T. R. 167. Abbott C.

Dow v. State

275 A.2d 815 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Apr 6, 1971

On December 11, 1967 the Board charged the petitioner with violation of the conditions of his probation reporting to the Superior Court 1) that Dow on October 12, 1967 had been convicted in the Hancock County Superior Court … State v. Smith, supra; State v. Allen, supra.

State v. Liberty

498 A.2d 257 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Sep 4, 1985

See, e.g., Goldthwaite v. Sheraton Restaurant, 154 Me. 214, 221 , 145 A.2d 362, 366 (1958); Watkins Co. v. Brown and McPherson, 134 Me. 473, 474 , 188 A. 212, 212 (1936) and cases cited therein; see generally, C. … State v.

White v. Estes

44 Me. 21 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Jul 1, 1857

that Talentine Estes delivered himself into his custody, as jailer, November 24, 1854; and went into close confinement, and so remained in jail, till the 8th of December, 1854, when he was discharged for non-payment of his board … Rollins v. Dow, 24 Maine R., 124; Fales v. Goodhue, 25 Maine R., 425.

Stevens v. Odlin

109 Me. 417 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Nov 4, 1912

Rogers v. White, 6 Maine, 1903; Hilton v. Hanson, 101 Maine, 21. Upon the first allegation of fraudulent representation in connection with Mr. … Brown v. Blunt, 72 Maine, 415. It is unnecessary to consider the exceptions, because the verdict is so manifestly wrong upon the evidence that the motion for a new trial must be granted. Motion sustained.

State v. Clisham

614 A.2d 1297 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Oct 7, 1992

See State v. … See M.R.Crim.P. 52(b); State v. True, 438 A.2d 460, 468-69 (Me.1981).

Jenkins v. Banks

148 Me. 276 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Nov 3, 1952

Byron v. … Pearson v. Hanna, 145 Me. 379 , Cayford v. Wilbur, 86 Me. 414 . Motion overruled. Judgment on the verdict.

Strout v. Burgess

144 Me. 263 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Aug 12, 1949

In its interpretation of this statute the Massachusetts Court stated in Smith v. Brown, 302 Mass. 432 ; 19 N. E. 2nd (Mass.) 732, 733: “It is provided by G. L. (Ter. … As this transfer was founded upon a valuable consideration, the rule that an intended gift cannot be enforced as a trust as stated in Brown v.

Robert F. Almeder v. Town of Kennebunkport

2014 ME 12 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Feb 4, 2014

Bell v. … , tubing, surfing, windsurfing, boogie boarding, rafting, paddle boarding, snorkeling, and the like.

Stevenson v. Town of Kennebunk

930 A.2d 1051 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Sep 20, 2007

. [¶ 1] The Town of Kennebunk has moved for reconsideration of our opinion in this matter, Stevenson v. … Town of Kennebunk, 2007 ME 55 , 930 A.2d 1046 , arguing that we should have affirmed the judgment of the Superior Court (York County, Brennan, J.) affirming the Kennebunk Board of Assessment Review’s denial of John M. and

U.S. Bank Trust, N.A. v. Jones

330 F. Supp. 3d 530 · District Court, D. Maine · Jun 26, 2018

Lopez's testimony about the "boarding"-or records transfer-of Ms. … Ass'n v.

State v. Lizotte

249 A.2d 874 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Jan 27, 1969

See Browne v. United States, 145 F. 1, 7 (2nd Cir., 1905). The acceptability of these twelve was determinable. … Christensen, 76 S.D. 201 , 75 N.W.2d 650 [11, 12], 654, 56 A.L.R.2d 734 (1956); Le Gro v. Moore, 1 Storey 116 , 138 A.2d 644 [1], 645 (Del.1958); Brown v.

Howard v. Maine Industrial School for Girls

78 Me. 230 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Apr 16, 1886

Jenness v. Mount Hope Iron Co. 53 Maine, 20; Maynard v. Tabor, 53 Maine, 511; Cumberland Bone Co. v. Atwood Lead Co. 63 Maine, 167. … Adams v. Hill, 16 Maine, 215; Hanson v. Dexter, 36 Maine, 516; Asylum v. Johnson, 43 Maine, 180; Curtis v. Portland, 59 Maine, 483. The evidence does not show'any such concurrence. Plaintiff nonsuit. Peters, C.

Williams v. ME. SUP. JUD. CT. INDIVIDUAL JUSTICES

350 F. Supp. 2d 136 · District Court, D. Maine · Dec 3, 2004

See Bettencourt v. … A response from the Board of Bar Overseers (Board) was due on or about June *140 10, 2004. The Board, failed to file any reply to the motion. See attached order p. 1.

Cole v. Chandler

752 A.2d 1189 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · May 26, 2000

See Beverage v. Cumberland Farms Northern, Inc., 502 A.2d 486, 489 (Me.1985); Li v. C.N. Brown Co., 645 A.2d 606, 607 (Me.1994). … See Li v. C.N. Brown Co., 645 A.2d 606 (Me.1994).

Bowler v. Welsh

719 F. Supp. 25 · District Court, D. Maine · Aug 22, 1989

Welsh Jr., Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer of the General Electric Co., Fairfield, Connecticut from the impressment and compulsory acquisition of [his] *26 shares (1200) in General Electric Canada Inc. … See Gerena v. Puerto Rico Legal Services, 697 F.2d 447, 449-452 (1st Cir.1983). John F.

Brooks v. Cedar Brook & Swift Cambridge River Improvement Co.

82 Me. 17 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Jun 5, 1889

Brown v. Chadbourne, 31 Maine, 9. The legislature authorized the defendant company, among other things, to build dams across this river for the purpose of facilitating the driving of logs, and improving the navigation. … In Moor v.

Kraul v. Maine Bonding & Casualty Co.

600 A.2d 389 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Dec 5, 1991

Brown v. Gillen, 569 A.2d 1206, 1213 (Me.1990); Baker v. Mid Maine Medical Center, 499 A.2d 464, 466 (Me.1985). … Co. v. Elwell, 513 A.2d 269, 272 (Me.1986) (quoting Roberts v. Maine Bonding & Casualty Co., 404 A.2d 238, 241 (Me.1979)).

In Re Armorflite Precision, Inc.

48 B.R. 994 · District Court, D. Maine · Apr 26, 1985

Roy, Inc. v. … See Reading Co. v. Brown, [ 391 U.S. 471 ] at 478 [ 88 S.Ct. 1759 at 1763 , 20 L.Ed.2d 751 ].”

Inhabitants of Eastport v. Belfast

40 Me. 262 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Jul 1, 1885

Selectmen of towns are constituted a board of examiners, *265 whoso duty shall be, upon complaint in writing of any relative of an insane person, &e., to inquire into tho condition of such person, &c., and they are authorized … Eastport v. East Machias, 35 Maine, 402. It cannot be impeached by parol evidence. If it is erroneous as a record, it may be reversed.