10 Maine opinions name it 2 courts 1952–2023 2 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 |
|---|---|---|
Forest Ecology Network v. Land Use Regulation Commissiongreen2 sentences2019Ass'n v. RSV 3 Bd. of Dirs., 2018 l\lIE 29, ~ 14, 180 A.3d 125 ; see also Forest Ecology Network v. land Use Regulation Comm'n, 2012 ME 36 , ~ 41, 39 A.3d 74 (quoting Nelson v. Bayroot, 2008 IvlE 91, 1f 17, 953 A.2d 378 ("We give 'considerable deference' to an agency's interpretation of its own rules, and the agency's interpretation will not be set aside 'unless the regulation or rule compels a contrary interpretation."). 2019Ass'n v. RSV 3 Bd. of Dirs., 2018 l\lIE 29, ~ 14, 180 A.3d 125 ; see also Forest Ecology Network v. land Use Regulation Comm'n, 2012 ME 36 , ~ 41, 39 A.3d 74 (quoting Nelson v. Bayroot, 2008 IvlE 91, 1f 17, 953 A.2d 378 ("We give 'considerable deference' to an agency's interpretation of its own rules, and the agency's interpretation will not be set aside 'unless the regulation or rule compels a contrary interpretation."). | 2 | 5 |
Nelson v. Bayroot, LLCgreen2 sentences2022AFSCME Council 93 v. Maine Labor Relations Board, 678 A.2d 591, 593 (Me. 1996); Nelson v. Bayroot, LLC, 2008 ME 91 , <][17, (The Court is to give considerable deference to an agency's interpretation of its own rules, and the agency's int rpretation will not be set aside "unless the regulation or rule compels a contrary interpretation.")(ernphasis added). 26. 2019Ass'n v. RSV 3 Bd. of Dirs., 2018 l\lIE 29, ~ 14, 180 A.3d 125 ; see also Forest Ecology Network v. land Use Regulation Comm'n, 2012 ME 36 , ~ 41, 39 A.3d 74 (quoting Nelson v. Bayroot, 2008 IvlE 91, 1f 17, 953 A.2d 378 ("We give 'considerable deference' to an agency's interpretation of its own rules, and the agency's interpretation will not be set aside 'unless the regulation or rule compels a contrary interpretation."). | 1 | 7 |
AFSCME Council 93 v. Maine Labor Relations Boardgreen1 sentence2022AFSCME Council 93 v. Maine Labor Relations Board, 678 A.2d 591, 593 (Me. 1996); Nelson v. Bayroot, LLC, 2008 ME 91 , <][17, (The Court is to give considerable deference to an agency's interpretation of its own rules, and the agency's int rpretation will not be set aside "unless the regulation or rule compels a contrary interpretation.")(ernphasis added). 26. | 1 | 1 |
Marjorie J. Getz v. Janis Walsh David M. Torangeau v. Janis Walshgreen1 sentence2022See Getz v. Walsh, 2014 ME 103 , <J[ 2. ("In eviewing an agency's inte ·pretation of its own rules, regulations, or procedur s, we giv considerable deference to the agency and will not set aside th ag ncy's interpretation unless the regulation or rule compels a contrary int rpretation." ) 5 IV. | 1 | 1 |
Keating v. Zoning Board of Appeals of City of Sacogreen1 sentence2014Nor did the Superi- or Court abuse its discretion in declining to apply the good cause exception we recognized in Keating v. Zoning Board of Appeals of Saco, 325 A.2d 521, 524 (Me.1974), to extend the time for appeal from the Commissioner’s decision granting the Walshes’ permit application. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Maine. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Toffling v. Toffling
green
2 sentences2014Similarly, "[i]n reviewing an agency's interpretation of its own rules, regulations, or procedures, we give considerable deference to the agency and will not set aside the agency's interpretation unless the regulation or rule compels a contrary result." Forest Ecology Network v. Land Use Regulation Comm'n, 2012 ME 36 , ~ 28, 39 A.3d 74 (quoting Nelson v. Bayroot, LLC, 2008 ME 90 , ~ 17, 953 A.2d 378 ). 2014"In reviewing an agency's interpretation of its own rules, regulations, or procedures, we give considerable deference to the agency and will not set aside the agency's interpretation unless the regulation or rule compels a contrary result." Forest Ecology Network v. Land Use Regulation Comm 'n, 2012 ME 36 , ~ 28, 39 A.3d 74 (quoting Nelson v. Bayroot, LLC, 2008 ME 90 , ~ 17, 953 A.2d 378 ). | 2 | 2014–2014 |
SAD 3 Education Association v. RSU 3 Board of Directors
neutral
1 sentence2019Ass'n v. RSV 3 Bd. of Dirs., 2018 l\lIE 29, ~ 14, 180 A.3d 125 ; see also Forest Ecology Network v. land Use Regulation Comm'n, 2012 ME 36 , ~ 41, 39 A.3d 74 (quoting Nelson v. Bayroot, 2008 IvlE 91, 1f 17, 953 A.2d 378 ("We give 'considerable deference' to an agency's interpretation of its own rules, and the agency's interpretation will not be set aside 'unless the regulation or rule compels a contrary interpretation."). | 1 | 2019–2019 |
Town of Warren Ambulance Service v. Department of Public Safety, Maine Emergency Medical Services
green
1 sentence2008Id. [¶ 18] We are asked to interpret section 10.17 of the Commission’s Land Use Standards, which governs the expiration of permits. | 1 | 2008–2008 |
Commonwealth v. Hilton
green
1 sentence1952Commonwealth v. Hilton, supra. Such a regulation is not in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution of the United States. | 1 | 1952–1952 |
State v. Leavitt
green
1 sentence1952As was said in State v. Leavitt, supra, at page 85, et seq.: “Since it must be assumed that the public interest required some limitation upon the right of clam fishing, it does not seem to us that it is unreasonable or - arbitrary for the State having a proprietary interest as well as a governmental power all for the public benefit to give the preference to those whom the law for more than two hundred and fifty years has given a preference, and who *409 were enjoying a preference when the Fourteenth Amendment was adopted, namely, the inhabitants of the town within which the fisheries are locat | 1 | 1952–1952 |
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.