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.
9 Maine opinions name it 2 courts 1941–2020 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 |
|---|---|---|
Michael Wuestenberg v. Harry J. Rancourt IIIgreen2 sentences2020See Wuestenberg v. Rancourt, 2020 ME 25, ¶ 11 , 226 A.3d 227 (stating that “we . . . give due regard to the trier of fact’s determinations on credibility, weight and significance of evidence.” (quotation marks omitted)). 6 [¶12] Based on its findings, the court entered an order denying Weyland’s motion to withdraw her guilty plea. 2020See Wuestenberg v. Rancourt, 2020 ME 25, ¶ 11 , 226 A.3d 227 (stating that “we . . . give due regard to the trier of fact’s determinations on credibility, weight and significance of evidence.” (quotation marks omitted)). 6 [¶12] Based on its findings, the court entered an order denying Weyland’s motion to withdraw her guilty plea. | 1 | 1 |
Arundel Valley, LLC v. Branch River Plastics, Inc.green2 sentences2017See Arundel Valley, LLC, 2016 ME 175, ¶ 11 , 151 A.3d 938 . 2017See Arundel Valley, LLC, 2016 ME 175, ¶ 11 , 151 A.3d 938 . | 1 | 1 |
Zink v. Zinkgreen1 sentence2002See Zink v. Zink, 687 A.2d 229, 232 (Me. 1996). | 1 | 1 |
Bryant v. Bryantgreen1 sentence1998II. [¶ 9] Ms. Day argues that the trial court should have awarded her counsel fees because the “effort and cost in defending [Mr. Day’s motion to amend] was not her choice.” A trial court “may” order a party to pay reasonable fees for actions concerning orders to amend an existing decree. 19-A M.R.S.A. § 952(3) (1998); see also Bryant v. Bryant, 411 A.2d 391, 395 (Me.1980) (court has broad discretion in its decision to award attorney fees in spousal support actions). | 1 | 1 |
Bureau of Employee Relations v. Maine Labor Relations Boardgreen1 sentence1998A court confronted with a claim of mootness must determine “whether there remain sufficient practical effects flowing from the resolution of the litigation to justify the application of limited judicial resources.” Bureau of Employee Relations v. Maine Labor Relations Bd., 655 A.2d 326, 327 (Me.1995). [¶ 9] Here, the Madores do not dispute the court’s findings that they did not hold the requisite interest in Lemoine’s property when they filed their complaint, did not renew that interest during the briefing period, and did not hold that interest on the day of the hearing in the Superior Court. | 1 | 1 |
Knox v. Remickgreen2 sentences1998See, e.g., Knox v. Remick, 371 Mass. 433 , 358 N.E.2d 432, 435-36 (1976) (modification to spousal support award justified when spouse became public charge subsequent to the execution and incorporation of the separation agreement). 1998See, e.g., Knox v. Remick, 371 Mass. 433 , 358 N.E.2d 432, 435-36 (1976) (modification to spousal support award justified when spouse became public charge subsequent to the execution and incorporation of the separation agreement). | 1 | 1 |
Lee v. Leegreen1 sentence1998See Lee v. Lee, 595 A.2d 408, 412 (Me.1991) (“An award of attorney fees is generally based on the parties’ relative capacity to absorb the costs of litigation.”) (internal quotations and citations omitted). | 1 | 1 |
Klingerman v. SOL Corp. of Mainegreen1 sentence1993Because Farley’s New York job search was within his control, it was not a “cause of a necessitous and compelling nature.” See Klingerman v. SOL Corp. of Maine, 505 A.2d 474, 476 (Me.1986) (applying the rule of construction that “when enumerating words are followed by words of general import, the general words, if their meaning is uncertain, should be controlled by the specific”). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Maine. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
In re Nicholas S.
green
2 sentences2020We review the court’s factual findings for clear error and will affirm its jeopardy determination “unless there is no competent record evidence that can rationally be understood to establish as more likely than not that the child was in circumstances of jeopardy to his or her health 1 The temporary protection order against the mother lapsed in June of 2019. 2On the day of the hearing, the court entered an agreed-to jeopardy order as to the father; he does not appeal from that order. 3 and welfare.” In re Nicholas S., 2016 ME 82, ¶ 9 , 140 A.3d 1226 (alteration omitted) (quotation marks omitted 2020We review the court’s factual findings for clear error and will affirm its jeopardy determination “unless there is no competent record evidence that can rationally be understood to establish as more likely than not that the child was in circumstances of jeopardy to his or her health 1 The temporary protection order against the mother lapsed in June of 2019. 2On the day of the hearing, the court entered an agreed-to jeopardy order as to the father; he does not appeal from that order. 3 and welfare.” In re Nicholas S., 2016 ME 82, ¶ 9 , 140 A.3d 1226 (alteration omitted) (quotation marks omitted | 1 | 2020–2020 |
In re A.M.
green
2 sentences2017He did not make an offer of proof or otherwise provide the court with a description of the information he would have offered to oppose the termination petition, particularly given the Department’s evidence that he had played virtually no role in the child’s life both before and during the pendency of this proceeding and had not made meaningful efforts to reunify with her.4 See In re A.M., 2012 ME 118, ¶ 25 , 4 We further note that as a result of the father’s unexplained failure to contact the court or his attorney on the day of the hearing when the alleged transportation problem arose, he did 2017He did not make an offer of proof or otherwise provide the court with a description of the information he would have offered to oppose the termination petition, particularly given the Department’s evidence that he had played virtually no role in the child’s life both before and during the pendency of this proceeding and had not made meaningful efforts to reunify with her.4 See In re A.M., 2012 ME 118, ¶ 25 , 4 We further note that as a result of the father’s unexplained failure to contact the court or his attorney on the day of the hearing when the alleged transportation problem arose, he did | 1 | 2017–2017 |
Magno v. Town of Freeport
green
1 sentence1998Id. [¶ 5] Wader filed a request for continuance for the following reasons: he was on the trailing trial list in the Cumberland County Superior Court and could be called for a trial on one hour’s notice; and also he had made plans to attend an auction scheduled the day of the hearing and to bid on a mobile home. | 1 | 1998–1998 |
People ex rel. Chaddock v. Barry
neutral
2 sentences1941Had the statute provided that the citation should be served 14 days before the day of hearing instead of 14 days before the time of hearing, it would have required a service of 14 full days.” So a summons returnable February 18 was seasonably served February 12, under a statute which required it to be served “at least six days before the time of appearance mentioned therein.” Chaddock v. Barry, 93 Mich., 542 , 53 N. W., 785 , 18 L.R.A., 337 . 1941Had the statute provided that the citation should be served 14 days before the day of hearing instead of 14 days before the time of hearing, it would have required a service of 14 full days.” So a summons returnable February 18 was seasonably served February 12, under a statute which required it to be served “at least six days before the time of appearance mentioned therein.” Chaddock v. Barry, 93 Mich., 542 , 53 N. W., 785 , 18 L.R.A., 337 . | 1 | 1941–1941 |
City of Port Huron v. Wright
green
2 sentences1941Notice of a hearing to be held by the state board of assessors on May 18 was seasonably published on May 13, under a statute which required the notice to be published “at least five days before the time at which such assessor is required to appear.” City of Port Huron v. Wright, 150 Mich, 279 , 114 N. W., 76 . 1941Notice of a hearing to be held by the state board of assessors on May 18 was seasonably published on May 13, under a statute which required the notice to be published “at least five days before the time at which such assessor is required to appear.” City of Port Huron v. Wright, 150 Mich, 279 , 114 N. W., 76 . | 1 | 1941–1941 |
In re Miller's Estate
green
2 sentences1941In re Miller's Estate, 173 Mich., 467 , 139 N. W., 17 . 1941In re Miller's Estate, 173 Mich., 467 , 139 N. W., 17 . | 1 | 1941–1941 |
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.