Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
10 Maine opinions name it 1 courts 1970–2024 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 |
|---|---|---|
cluster 375761green2 sentences2024See, e.g., Ala. Nursing Home Ass’n v. Harris, 617 F.2d 388, 396 (5th Cir. 1980) (holding that state health department’s failure to obtain sufficient funds to cover Medicaid expenditures did not preclude eligible providers from receiving reasonable cost reimbursement); Doe v. Chiles, 136 F.3d 709, 721-722 (11th Cir. 1998). [¶29] In this case, there is nothing on the record explaining why there were inadequate resources for this child, nor is there evidence of any advocacy on behalf of the child or the mother by the Department, the GAL, or the mother’s 6 The September 8, 2022, reunification plan 2024See, e.g., Ala. Nursing Home Ass’n v. Harris, 617 F.2d 388, 396 (5th Cir. 1980) (holding that state health department’s failure to obtain sufficient funds to cover Medicaid expenditures did not preclude eligible providers from receiving reasonable cost reimbursement); Doe v. Chiles, 136 F.3d 709, 721-722 (11th Cir. 1998). [¶29] In this case, there is nothing on the record explaining why there were inadequate resources for this child, nor is there evidence of any advocacy on behalf of the child or the mother by the Department, the GAL, or the mother’s 6 The September 8, 2022, reunification plan | 2 | 2 |
cluster 751677green2 sentences2024See, e.g., Ala. Nursing Home Ass’n v. Harris, 617 F.2d 388, 396 (5th Cir. 1980) (holding that state health department’s failure to obtain sufficient funds to cover Medicaid expenditures did not preclude eligible providers from receiving reasonable cost reimbursement); Doe v. Chiles, 136 F.3d 709, 721-722 (11th Cir. 1998). [¶29] In this case, there is nothing on the record explaining why there were inadequate resources for this child, nor is there evidence of any advocacy on behalf of the child or the mother by the Department, the GAL, or the mother’s 6 The September 8, 2022, reunification plan 2024See, e.g., Ala. Nursing Home Ass’n v. Harris, 617 F.2d 388, 396 (5th Cir. 1980) (holding that state health department’s failure to obtain sufficient funds to cover Medicaid expenditures did not preclude eligible providers from receiving reasonable cost reimbursement); Doe v. Chiles, 136 F.3d 709, 721-722 (11th Cir. 1998). [¶29] In this case, there is nothing on the record explaining why there were inadequate resources for this child, nor is there evidence of any advocacy on behalf of the child or the mother by the Department, the GAL, or the mother’s 6 The September 8, 2022, reunification plan | 2 | 2 |
Pamela Haskell v. Dusty Haskellgreen1 sentence2019See Haskell v. Haskell , 2017 ME 91 , ¶ 15, 160 A.3d 1176 ; cf. In re Destiny T. , 2009 ME 26 , ¶ 15, 965 A.2d 872 (vacating jeopardy finding when the father was not notified that jeopardy would be considered at the scheduled hearing). | 1 | 1 |
Haskell v. Haskellgreen1 sentence2019See Haskell v. Haskell , 2017 ME 91 , ¶ 15, 160 A.3d 1176 ; cf. In re Destiny T. , 2009 ME 26 , ¶ 15, 965 A.2d 872 (vacating jeopardy finding when the father was not notified that jeopardy would be considered at the scheduled hearing). | 1 | 1 |
Thomas v. Thompsongreen1 sentence2007When reviewing a motion to lift a default judgment, we have previously stated that “[t]here is a strong preference in our law for deciding cases on the merits.” Thomas v. Thompson, 653 A.2d 417, 420 (Me.1995). [¶ 14] In the present case, Spado appeared at the scheduled hearing on October 19, 2005, as the form N-103 instructed her to do. | 1 | 1 |
Frazier v. Bankamerica Internationalgreen1 sentence2005See Frazier v. BankAmerica Int'l, 593 A.2d 661, 663 (Me.1991). | 1 | 1 |
Concord General Mutual Insurance v. Labbegreen1 sentence2002Co. v. Labbe, 401 A.2d 1005, 1007 (Me.1979) (holding court abused its discretion in denying continuance when letter announcing hearing was ambiguous and failed to “give notice of the true nature of the scheduled hearing”). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Maine. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Heidi Vibert v. Antonios N. Dimoulas
green
2 sentences2019See 22 M.R.S. 4055(1)(B)(2) (2018); Vibert v. Dimoulas, 2017 ME 62, ¶ 15 , 159 A.3d 325 . 3 During the colloquy about the effect of the father’s arrest on the scheduled hearing, the mother’s attorney and the children’s guardian ad litem reported to the court that the father was taken into custody after he threatened the mother that he would “smash her face into a million f-ing pieces.” 4 [A]side from attending [the court-ordered diagnostic evaluation, the father] has not engaged in any service requested by the Department or [o]rdered by this Court. 2019See 22 M.R.S. 4055(1)(B)(2) (2018); Vibert v. Dimoulas, 2017 ME 62, ¶ 15 , 159 A.3d 325 . 3 During the colloquy about the effect of the father’s arrest on the scheduled hearing, the mother’s attorney and the children’s guardian ad litem reported to the court that the father was taken into custody after he threatened the mother that he would “smash her face into a million f-ing pieces.” 4 [A]side from attending [the court-ordered diagnostic evaluation, the father] has not engaged in any service requested by the Department or [o]rdered by this Court. | 1 | 2019–2019 |
In re Destiny T.
green
2 sentences2019See Haskell v. Haskell , 2017 ME 91 , ¶ 15, 160 A.3d 1176 ; cf. In re Destiny T. , 2009 ME 26 , ¶ 15, 965 A.2d 872 (vacating jeopardy finding when the father was not notified that jeopardy would be considered at the scheduled hearing). 2019See Haskell v. Haskell , 2017 ME 91 , ¶ 15, 160 A.3d 1176 ; cf. In re Destiny T. , 2009 ME 26 , ¶ 15, 965 A.2d 872 (vacating jeopardy finding when the father was not notified that jeopardy would be considered at the scheduled hearing). | 1 | 2019–2019 |
Sheepscot Land Corp. v. Gregory
green
1 sentence2006Id. | 1 | 2006–2006 |
Dumont v. Fleet Bank of Maine
green
2 sentences2001These actions suggested significant carelessness in her defense of the matter which the trial court could view as confirmed by her untimely answer. [¶ 11] Although Browne is representing herself, we afford her no bending of the rules or other "special consideration." See Dumont v. Fleet Bank of Maine, 2000 ME 197, ¶ 13 , 760 A.2d 1049, 1054 . 2001These actions suggested significant carelessness in her defense of the matter which the trial court could view as confirmed by her untimely answer. [¶ 11] Although Browne is representing herself, we afford her no bending of the rules or other "special consideration." See Dumont v. Fleet Bank of Maine, 2000 ME 197, ¶ 13 , 760 A.2d 1049, 1054 . | 1 | 2001–2001 |
Ungar v. Sarafite
green
2 sentences1970In Ungar v. Sarafite (1964) 376 U.S. 575 , 84 S.Ct. 841, 850 , 11 L.Ed.2d 921 the Supreme Court said: “The court denied the motion for adjournment, being of the view that Ungar had been afforded sufficient time to hire counsel who would be available at the time of the scheduled hearing. 1970In Ungar v. Sarafite (1964) 376 U.S. 575 , 84 S.Ct. 841, 850 , 11 L.Ed.2d 921 the Supreme Court said: “The court denied the motion for adjournment, being of the view that Ungar had been afforded sufficient time to hire counsel who would be available at the time of the scheduled hearing. | 1 | 1970–1970 |
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.