Case law

Hegarty v. Somerset County

848 F. Supp. 257 · District Court, D. Maine · Mar 23, 1994

See Grandstaff v. … Mitchell v.

Hurley v. Inhabitants of South Thomaston

105 Me. 301 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Mar 31, 1909

Shaw in Com. v. … Brigham v. Worcester County, 147 Mass. 446 ; Damon v. Reading, 2 Gray, 274 .

Berman v. Griggs

145 Me. 258 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Aug 4, 1950

We said in Frye v. E. … Allen et al. v. Goodnow et al., 71 Me. 425 . In Holt v.

Duncan v. Robbins

159 Me. 339 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Aug 8, 1963

State v. Furbush, 72 Me. 493, 496 ; Whiting v. Burger, 78 Me. 287, 295 ; Waterville Realty Corp. v. Eastport, 136 Me. 309, 315 ; Higgins v. Carr Brothers Co., 138 Me. 264, 271 . … Lane v. Brown, — U. S. —, 9 L. ed. (2nd) 892 was also decided, March 18, 1963. We quote the authentic head note 1 from 9 L. ed. (2nd) 892, 893: “1.

Pearson v. Aroostook County Patrons Mutual Fire Insurance

149 Me. 313 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Nov 6, 1953

Co. of New York v. … Co. v. Baker (1952), 254 S.

Herrick v. Theberge

474 A.2d 870 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Apr 11, 1984

See Ingalls v. Brown, 460 A.2d 1379, 1381 (Me.1983); Mechanics’ Savings Bank v. Bridges, 450 A.2d 904, 904 (Me.1982). The attorney’s affidavit contains no information stemming from his personal knowledge. … Harmon v. Emerson, 425 A.2d 978, 981 (Me.1981) (quoting Jacobs v. Boomer, 267 A.2d 376, 379 (Me.1970)).

Chase v. Town of York

Superior Court of Maine · Oct 16, 2002

AP-01-062 PAF-YoRrR- 5 /ofavoe MARY V. CHASE, Plaintiff/ Appellant ORDER —- DONALD L. SANSRECH: v. … MARY V. CHASE, Plaintiff/ Appellant -. ORDER FOLLOWING Vv. REMAND . DONALD L.

Wiper v. City of S. Portland

Superior Court of Maine · Mar 3, 2008

Factual findings by the Board must be upheld if there is any competent evidence in the record to support those findings. York v. Town of Ogunquit, 2001 ME 53 <.IT 14, 769 A.2d 172, 178. … In Gagne v.

Tinker v. Continental Insurance

410 A.2d 550 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Jan 30, 1980

In 1969, pursuant to the recommendation of The Maine Insurance Advisory Board, 2 the State requested that CNA delete the “fellow employee exclusion”, so-called, from the policy then in force. … T —M Oil Co. v. Pasquale, Me., 388 A.2d 82 (1978).

Cushing v. State

434 A.2d 486 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Aug 24, 1981

Brown, Kay R. H. Evans, Asst. Attys. Gen., Augusta, for defendants. Before WERNICK, GODFREY, NICHOLS and ROBERTS, JJ. ROBERTS, Justice. … See Brown v. Bishop, 105 Me. 272, 277 , 74 A. 724, 727 (1909); Walker v. Lincoln, 45 Me. 67, 70 (1858); Small v. Small, 35 Me. 400, 401 (1853).

Cairns v. Town of Gorham

Superior Court of Maine · Oct 28, 2002

DISCUSSION A decision of the Board of Appeals is reviewed for an error of law, abuse of discretion, or findings of fact not supported by substantial evidence in the record. Yates v. … ~ review only the record established before the Board in order to determine whether the standards have been met. Sahl v. Town of York, 2000 ME 180, J 11, 760 A.2d 266, 269.

LaRose v. City of Biddeford

Superior Court of Maine · Aug 29, 2003

AP-02-053 SIMONE LAROSE, ) ) Plaintiff ) Tort tae “yo > -~=-BECISIGON AND ORDER v. ) ) THE CITY OF BIDDEFORD, and ) PETER E. PETIT and KIMN. … Because the Board’s findings and conclusion fail to meet these standards, this matter must be remanded to the Board. See Chapel Road Associates, L.L.C. v.

Cassat v. Town of Scarborough

Superior Court of Maine · Jun 29, 2012

The court does "not make any findings other than those found explicitly or implicitly by the Board" and does "not substitute [its] judgment for that of the Board." Camp v. … Further, "[a] demonstration that no competent evidence supports the local board's findings is required in order to vacate the board's decision." Thacker v. Konover Dev.

Miner v. Inhabs. of the Town of Benton

Superior Court of Maine · Dec 31, 2008

"[T]he fact that two inconsistent conclusions can be drawn from the evidence does not mean that a Board's finding is unsupported by substantial evidence." Conservation Law Found., Inc. v. … Index 5, Tab 6). 2  The burden of persuaSIOn rests with plaintiffs, who seek to overturn the Board's decision. See Mack v. Mun.

O'Connell v. Bar Harbor Bd. of Appeals

Superior Court of Maine · May 6, 2010

In Salisbury v. … In Moore v. Town of Bar Harbor, 2009 Me. Unpub.

The Cote Corporation v. Kelley Earthworks, Inc.

97 A.3d 127 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Jul 17, 2014

Graham v. Brown, 2011 ME 93, ¶ 12, 26 A.3d 823 (quotation marks omitted). The court did not err in relying on the only competent evidence of Cote’s damages that was before it. B. … Corp. v.

Inhabitants of the Town of Easton v. Glick

Superior Court of Maine · Jan 3, 2017

Vienna v. Kokernak, 612 A.2d 870, 872 (Me. I 992). … Yusem v. Town of Raymoncl, 200 l ME 61, ~ 8.

Neptune Line, Inc. v. Stone & Cooper

34 F.2d 226 · District Court, D. Maine · Oct 2, 1926

In Merritt v. Sprague (D. C.) 191 F. 627 , I found the dock clearly unsafe. A boulder was discovered at the point where the injured vessel rested. In Philadelphia & R. R. Co. v. Walker (D. … In Smith v. Havemeyer (D. C.) 32 F. 844 , Judge Addison Brown had before him a ease in which the libelant’s vessel was injured by a spike projecting from a beam in the wharf.

Sears, Roebuck & Co. v. SEARS, TAX ASSESSOR

561 A.2d 172 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Jun 22, 1989

In Coca-Cola Co. v. … In Caterpillar Tractor Co. v.

Washburn & Doughty v. Pottle

Superior Court of Maine · Nov 6, 2007

McPherson Timberlands, Inc. v. Unemployment Ins. Comm'n, 1998 ME 177,<][ 6,714 A.2d 818, 820. … Town of Ogunquit v. 2 At the time of appeal 39-A M.R.S.A. § 360(3) read in pertinent part: 3. Appeal.