5 Maine opinions name it 1 courts 2017–2017 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Maine courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Sheepscot Land Corp. v. Gregorygreen2 sentences2017Cf. Suzman v. Comm’r, Dep’t of Health & Human Servs., 2005 ME 80, ¶ 24 , 876 A.2d 29 (“Neither this Court nor the Superior Court, acting in an appellate capacity, is free to make factual findings independent of those made by [an] agency .... ”); see also Sheepscot Land Corp. v. Gregory, 383 A.2d 16, 24 (Me. 1978) (“Whether the default entry or default judgment resulted from factual circumstances justifying relief is a question of fact and must be proven by evidence ....”). [¶ 11] Thus, assuming that, as an appellate court, the Superior Court identified an important factual allegation in the re 2017Cf. Suzman v. Comm’r, Dep’t of Health & Human Servs., 2005 ME 80, ¶ 24 , 876 A.2d 29 (“Neither this Court nor the Superior Court, acting in an appellate capacity, is free to make factual findings independent of those made by [an] agency .... ”); see also Sheepscot Land Corp. v. Gregory, 383 A.2d 16, 24 (Me. 1978) (“Whether the default entry or default judgment resulted from factual circumstances justifying relief is a question of fact and must be proven by evidence ....”). [¶ 11] Thus, assuming that, as an appellate court, the Superior Court identified an important factual allegation in the re | 5 | 5 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Maine. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Suzman v. Commissioner, Department of Health & Human Services
green
2 sentences2017Cf. Suzman v. Comm’r, Dep’t of Health & Human Servs., 2005 ME 80, ¶ 24 , 876 A.2d 29 (“Neither this Court nor the Superior Court, acting in an appellate capacity, is free to make factual findings independent of those made by [an] agency .... ”); see also Sheepscot Land Corp. v. Gregory, 383 A.2d 16, 24 (Me. 1978) (“Whether the default entry or default judgment resulted from factual circumstances justifying relief is a question of fact and must be proven by evidence ....”). [¶ 11] Thus, assuming that, as an appellate court, the Superior Court identified an important factual allegation in the re 2017Cf. Suzman v. Comm’r, Dep’t of Health & Human Servs., 2005 ME 80, ¶ 24 , 876 A.2d 29 (“Neither this Court nor the Superior Court, acting in an appellate capacity, is free to make factual findings independent of those made by [an] agency .... ”); see also Sheepscot Land Corp. v. Gregory, 383 A.2d 16, 24 (Me. 1978) (“Whether the default entry or default judgment resulted from factual circumstances justifying relief is a question of fact and must be proven by evidence ....”). [¶ 11] Thus, assuming that, as an appellate court, the Superior Court identified an important factual allegation in the re | 5 | 2017–2017 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.