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.
8 Maine opinions name it 2 courts 1953–2023 1 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 |
|---|---|---|
Pratt v. Sidneygreen2 sentences2023See, e.g., Pratt v. Sidney, 2009 ME 28, ¶ 11 , 967 A.2d 685 (specifying that a substantially-equal-care determination requires a detailed inquiry into an array of factors); Nicholson, 2000 ME 12, ¶ 9 , 747 A.2d 588 (explaining that “[t]he party seeking to have the court deviate from the guidelines has the burden to overcome the presumption” that the obligation derived from the guidelines is the proper amount). 2023See, e.g., Pratt v. Sidney, 2009 ME 28, ¶ 11 , 967 A.2d 685 (specifying that a substantially-equal-care determination requires a detailed inquiry into an array of factors); Nicholson, 2000 ME 12, ¶ 9 , 747 A.2d 588 (explaining that “[t]he party seeking to have the court deviate from the guidelines has the burden to overcome the presumption” that the obligation derived from the guidelines is the proper amount). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Genottigreen1 sentence2020See, e.g., State v. Lowe, 2015 ME 124 , ¶ 23 n.6, 124 A.3d 156 ; State v. Genotti, 601 A.2d 1013, 1021 (Conn. 1992) (declining to reach this precise issue absent “a separate state constitutional analysis alleging a violation of . . . state due process rights”); cf. Morales, 657 A.2d at 589 & n.10 (reaching the state constitutional law issue because the appellant had “furnish[ed] a detailed analysis” related specifically to the state constitution). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Perezgreen1 sentence2020As the Connecticut Supreme Court has stated, “reliance on other state constitutional precedent does not suffice as a proxy for independent analysis of our own constitutional language, history, tradition and policy.” State v. Perez, 591 A.2d 119, 124 (Conn. 1991). | 1 | 1 |
State of Maine v. Kristina I. Lowegreen2 sentences2020See, e.g., State v. Lowe, 2015 ME 124 , ¶ 23 n.6, 124 A.3d 156 ; State v. Genotti, 601 A.2d 1013, 1021 (Conn. 1992) (declining to reach this precise issue absent “a separate state constitutional analysis alleging a violation of . . . state due process rights”); cf. Morales, 657 A.2d at 589 & n.10 (reaching the state constitutional law issue because the appellant had “furnish[ed] a detailed analysis” related specifically to the state constitution). 2020See, e.g., State v. Lowe, 2015 ME 124 , ¶ 23 n.6, 124 A.3d 156 ; State v. Genotti, 601 A.2d 1013, 1021 (Conn. 1992) (declining to reach this precise issue absent “a separate state constitutional analysis alleging a violation of . . . state due process rights”); cf. Morales, 657 A.2d at 589 & n.10 (reaching the state constitutional law issue because the appellant had “furnish[ed] a detailed analysis” related specifically to the state constitution). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Weisbrodegreen2 sentences2019Moreover, "this applies with particular force to the statements of prosecutors, and ... [a] prosecutor's statements of personal opinion are particularly troubling when the comments concern a defendant's credibility and the case is a close one." Id. at 416 ; State v. Michaud , 2017 ME 170 , ¶ 13, 168 A.3d 802 (concluding that the prosecutor's comment that " 'science doesn't lie' was isolated, was not initially objected to, and did not involve vouching for a particular witness," and stating, " Most important, the prosecutor never argued that [ defendant ] was lying " (emphasis added)); see also 2019Moreover, "this applies with particular force to the statements of prosecutors, and ... [a] prosecutor's statements of personal opinion are particularly troubling when the comments concern a defendant's credibility and the case is a close one." Id. at 416 ; State v. Michaud , 2017 ME 170 , ¶ 13, 168 A.3d 802 (concluding that the prosecutor's comment that " 'science doesn't lie' was isolated, was not initially objected to, and did not involve vouching for a particular witness," and stating, " Most important, the prosecutor never argued that [ defendant ] was lying " (emphasis added)); see also | 1 | 1 |
State v. Trippgreen2 sentences2019Moreover, "this applies with particular force to the statements of prosecutors, and ... [a] prosecutor's statements of personal opinion are particularly troubling when the comments concern a defendant's credibility and the case is a close one." Id. at 416 ; State v. Michaud , 2017 ME 170 , ¶ 13, 168 A.3d 802 (concluding that the prosecutor's comment that " 'science doesn't lie' was isolated, was not initially objected to, and did not involve vouching for a particular witness," and stating, " Most important, the prosecutor never argued that [ defendant ] was lying " (emphasis added)); see also 2019Moreover, "this applies with particular force to the statements of prosecutors, and ... [a] prosecutor's statements of personal opinion are particularly troubling when the comments concern a defendant's credibility and the case is a close one." Id. at 416 ; State v. Michaud , 2017 ME 170 , ¶ 13, 168 A.3d 802 (concluding that the prosecutor's comment that " 'science doesn't lie' was isolated, was not initially objected to, and did not involve vouching for a particular witness," and stating, " Most important, the prosecutor never argued that [ defendant ] was lying " (emphasis added)); see also | 1 | 1 |
United States v. Luis Morales-Montanezgreen2 sentences2019Moreover, “this applies with particular force to the statements of prosecutors, and . . . [a] prosecutor’s statements of personal opinion are particularly troubling when the comments concern a defendant’s credibility and the case is a close one.” Id. at 416 ; State v. Michaud, 2017 ME 170, ¶ 13 , 168 A.3d 802 (concluding that the prosecutor’s comment that “‘science doesn’t lie’ was isolated, was not initially objected to, and did not involve vouching for a particular witness,” and stating, “Most important, the prosecutor never argued that [defendant] was lying” (emphasis added)); see also Acos 2019Moreover, "this applies with particular force to the statements of prosecutors, and ... [a] prosecutor's statements of personal opinion are particularly troubling when the comments concern a defendant's credibility and the case is a close one." Id. at 416 ; State v. Michaud , 2017 ME 170 , ¶ 13, 168 A.3d 802 (concluding that the prosecutor's comment that " 'science doesn't lie' was isolated, was not initially objected to, and did not involve vouching for a particular witness," and stating, " Most important, the prosecutor never argued that [ defendant ] was lying " (emphasis added)); see also | 1 | 1 |
Willis Realty Associates v. Cimino Construction Co.green1 sentence2003A similar result was reached in a brief opinion in Willis Realty Associates v. Cimino Construction Company, 623 A.2d 1287, 1288-9 (Me. 1993) and in a more detailed analysis in Acadia Insurance Co. v. Buck Construction Co., 2000 ME 154 , ¢] 11-19, 756 A.2d 515, 518-20 . | 1 | 1 |
Westhemeco Ltd. v. New Hampshire Insurancegreen1 sentence1986More importantly, that analysis ignores the inescapable fact that the ordinary business of an insurance adjuster is not only “to deter-min[e] whether to pay its insured,” Westhemeco Ltd. v. New Hampshire Insurance Co., 82 F.R.D. 702, 708 (S.D.N.Y.1979), but also to prepare for litigation. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Maine. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Nicholson v. Nicholson
green
2 sentences2023See, e.g., Pratt v. Sidney, 2009 ME 28, ¶ 11 , 967 A.2d 685 (specifying that a substantially-equal-care determination requires a detailed inquiry into an array of factors); Nicholson, 2000 ME 12, ¶ 9 , 747 A.2d 588 (explaining that “[t]he party seeking to have the court deviate from the guidelines has the burden to overcome the presumption” that the obligation derived from the guidelines is the proper amount). 2023See, e.g., Pratt v. Sidney, 2009 ME 28, ¶ 11 , 967 A.2d 685 (specifying that a substantially-equal-care determination requires a detailed inquiry into an array of factors); Nicholson, 2000 ME 12, ¶ 9 , 747 A.2d 588 (explaining that “[t]he party seeking to have the court deviate from the guidelines has the burden to overcome the presumption” that the obligation derived from the guidelines is the proper amount). | 1 | 2023–2023 |
State v. Morales
green
1 sentence2020See, e.g., State v. Lowe, 2015 ME 124 , ¶ 23 n.6, 124 A.3d 156 ; State v. Genotti, 601 A.2d 1013, 1021 (Conn. 1992) (declining to reach this precise issue absent “a separate state constitutional analysis alleging a violation of . . . state due process rights”); cf. Morales, 657 A.2d at 589 & n.10 (reaching the state constitutional law issue because the appellant had “furnish[ed] a detailed analysis” related specifically to the state constitution). | 1 | 2020–2020 |
State of Maine v. Yvonne Michaud
green
2 sentences2019Moreover, “this applies with particular force to the statements of prosecutors, and . . . [a] prosecutor’s statements of personal opinion are particularly troubling when the comments concern a defendant’s credibility and the case is a close one.” Id. at 416 ; State v. Michaud, 2017 ME 170, ¶ 13 , 168 A.3d 802 (concluding that the prosecutor’s comment that “‘science doesn’t lie’ was isolated, was not initially objected to, and did not involve vouching for a particular witness,” and stating, “Most important, the prosecutor never argued that [defendant] was lying” (emphasis added)); see also Acos 2019Moreover, "this applies with particular force to the statements of prosecutors, and ... [a] prosecutor's statements of personal opinion are particularly troubling when the comments concern a defendant's credibility and the case is a close one." Id. at 416 ; State v. Michaud , 2017 ME 170 , ¶ 13, 168 A.3d 802 (concluding that the prosecutor's comment that " 'science doesn't lie' was isolated, was not initially objected to, and did not involve vouching for a particular witness," and stating, " Most important, the prosecutor never argued that [ defendant ] was lying " (emphasis added)); see also | 1 | 2019–2019 |
Department of Health & Human Services v. Pelletier
green
2 sentences2019The same is true for GBT’s argument that the court should have engaged in a more detailed analysis to equitably adjust the substantial completion dates. 13 2009 ME 11, ¶ 18 , 964 A.2d 630 (“A misrepresentation need not consist solely of an affirmative statement . . . .”). [¶23] The court’s findings do not contain clear error, and its ultimate determination that equitable estoppel barred GBT’s claim for liquidated damages was well within its discretion. 2019The same is true for GBT’s argument that the court should have engaged in a more detailed analysis to equitably adjust the substantial completion dates. 13 2009 ME 11, ¶ 18 , 964 A.2d 630 (“A misrepresentation need not consist solely of an affirmative statement . . . .”). [¶23] The court’s findings do not contain clear error, and its ultimate determination that equitable estoppel barred GBT’s claim for liquidated damages was well within its discretion. | 1 | 2019–2019 |
State v. Michaud
green
2 sentences2019Moreover, “this applies with particular force to the statements of prosecutors, and . . . [a] prosecutor’s statements of personal opinion are particularly troubling when the comments concern a defendant’s credibility and the case is a close one.” Id. at 416 ; State v. Michaud, 2017 ME 170, ¶ 13 , 168 A.3d 802 (concluding that the prosecutor’s comment that “‘science doesn’t lie’ was isolated, was not initially objected to, and did not involve vouching for a particular witness,” and stating, “Most important, the prosecutor never argued that [defendant] was lying” (emphasis added)); see also Acos 2019Moreover, "this applies with particular force to the statements of prosecutors, and ... [a] prosecutor's statements of personal opinion are particularly troubling when the comments concern a defendant's credibility and the case is a close one." Id. at 416 ; State v. Michaud , 2017 ME 170 , ¶ 13, 168 A.3d 802 (concluding that the prosecutor's comment that " 'science doesn't lie' was isolated, was not initially objected to, and did not involve vouching for a particular witness," and stating, " Most important, the prosecutor never argued that [ defendant ] was lying " (emphasis added)); see also | 1 | 2019–2019 |
Michigan v. Mosley
green
2 sentences2008Id. at 104-105 , 96 S.Ct. 321 . 2008Id. at 104-105 , 96 S.Ct. 321 . | 1 | 2008–2008 |
Acadia Insurance Co. v. Buck Construction Co.
green
2 sentences2003A similar result was reached in a brief opinion in Willis Realty Associates v. Cimino Construction Company, 623 A.2d 1287, 1288-9 (Me. 1993) and in a more detailed analysis in Acadia Insurance Co. v. Buck Construction Co., 2000 ME 154 , ¢] 11-19, 756 A.2d 515, 518-20 . 2003A similar result was reached in a brief opinion in Willis Realty Associates v. Cimino Construction Company, 623 A.2d 1287, 1288-9 (Me. 1993) and in a more detailed analysis in Acadia Insurance Co. v. Buck Construction Co., 2000 ME 154 , ¢] 11-19, 756 A.2d 515, 518-20 . | 1 | 2003–2003 |
Smith v. State
green
1 sentence1953State v. Lashus, 79 Me. 541 ; State v. Androscoggin Railroad Co., 76 Me. 411 ; State v. Doran, 99 Me. 329 ; State v. Mace, 76 Me. 64 ; State v. Moran, 40 Me. 129 ; State v. Crouse, 117 Me. 363 ; State v. Beckwith, 135 Me. 423 ; State v. Strout, 132 Me. 134 ; State v. Peterson, 136 Me. 165 , and Smith, Pet’r. v. State of Maine, 145 Me. 313 . | 1 | 1953–1953 |
State v. Moran
neutral
1 sentence1953State v. Lashus, 79 Me. 541 ; State v. Androscoggin Railroad Co., 76 Me. 411 ; State v. Doran, 99 Me. 329 ; State v. Mace, 76 Me. 64 ; State v. Moran, 40 Me. 129 ; State v. Crouse, 117 Me. 363 ; State v. Beckwith, 135 Me. 423 ; State v. Strout, 132 Me. 134 ; State v. Peterson, 136 Me. 165 , and Smith, Pet’r. v. State of Maine, 145 Me. 313 . | 1 | 1953–1953 |
State v. Mace
green
1 sentence1953State v. Lashus, 79 Me. 541 ; State v. Androscoggin Railroad Co., 76 Me. 411 ; State v. Doran, 99 Me. 329 ; State v. Mace, 76 Me. 64 ; State v. Moran, 40 Me. 129 ; State v. Crouse, 117 Me. 363 ; State v. Beckwith, 135 Me. 423 ; State v. Strout, 132 Me. 134 ; State v. Peterson, 136 Me. 165 , and Smith, Pet’r. v. State of Maine, 145 Me. 313 . | 1 | 1953–1953 |
State v. Androscoggin Railroad
neutral
1 sentence1953State v. Lashus, 79 Me. 541 ; State v. Androscoggin Railroad Co., 76 Me. 411 ; State v. Doran, 99 Me. 329 ; State v. Mace, 76 Me. 64 ; State v. Moran, 40 Me. 129 ; State v. Crouse, 117 Me. 363 ; State v. Beckwith, 135 Me. 423 ; State v. Strout, 132 Me. 134 ; State v. Peterson, 136 Me. 165 , and Smith, Pet’r. v. State of Maine, 145 Me. 313 . | 1 | 1953–1953 |
State v. Lashus
green
1 sentence1953State v. Lashus, 79 Me. 541 ; State v. Androscoggin Railroad Co., 76 Me. 411 ; State v. Doran, 99 Me. 329 ; State v. Mace, 76 Me. 64 ; State v. Moran, 40 Me. 129 ; State v. Crouse, 117 Me. 363 ; State v. Beckwith, 135 Me. 423 ; State v. Strout, 132 Me. 134 ; State v. Peterson, 136 Me. 165 , and Smith, Pet’r. v. State of Maine, 145 Me. 313 . | 1 | 1953–1953 |
State v. Doran
green
1 sentence1953State v. Lashus, 79 Me. 541 ; State v. Androscoggin Railroad Co., 76 Me. 411 ; State v. Doran, 99 Me. 329 ; State v. Mace, 76 Me. 64 ; State v. Moran, 40 Me. 129 ; State v. Crouse, 117 Me. 363 ; State v. Beckwith, 135 Me. 423 ; State v. Strout, 132 Me. 134 ; State v. Peterson, 136 Me. 165 , and Smith, Pet’r. v. State of Maine, 145 Me. 313 . | 1 | 1953–1953 |
State v. Crouse
green
1 sentence1953State v. Lashus, 79 Me. 541 ; State v. Androscoggin Railroad Co., 76 Me. 411 ; State v. Doran, 99 Me. 329 ; State v. Mace, 76 Me. 64 ; State v. Moran, 40 Me. 129 ; State v. Crouse, 117 Me. 363 ; State v. Beckwith, 135 Me. 423 ; State v. Strout, 132 Me. 134 ; State v. Peterson, 136 Me. 165 , and Smith, Pet’r. v. State of Maine, 145 Me. 313 . | 1 | 1953–1953 |
State v. Strout
neutral
1 sentence1953State v. Lashus, 79 Me. 541 ; State v. Androscoggin Railroad Co., 76 Me. 411 ; State v. Doran, 99 Me. 329 ; State v. Mace, 76 Me. 64 ; State v. Moran, 40 Me. 129 ; State v. Crouse, 117 Me. 363 ; State v. Beckwith, 135 Me. 423 ; State v. Strout, 132 Me. 134 ; State v. Peterson, 136 Me. 165 , and Smith, Pet’r. v. State of Maine, 145 Me. 313 . | 1 | 1953–1953 |
State v. Beckwith
green
1 sentence1953State v. Lashus, 79 Me. 541 ; State v. Androscoggin Railroad Co., 76 Me. 411 ; State v. Doran, 99 Me. 329 ; State v. Mace, 76 Me. 64 ; State v. Moran, 40 Me. 129 ; State v. Crouse, 117 Me. 363 ; State v. Beckwith, 135 Me. 423 ; State v. Strout, 132 Me. 134 ; State v. Peterson, 136 Me. 165 , and Smith, Pet’r. v. State of Maine, 145 Me. 313 . | 1 | 1953–1953 |
State v. Peterson
neutral
1 sentence1953State v. Lashus, 79 Me. 541 ; State v. Androscoggin Railroad Co., 76 Me. 411 ; State v. Doran, 99 Me. 329 ; State v. Mace, 76 Me. 64 ; State v. Moran, 40 Me. 129 ; State v. Crouse, 117 Me. 363 ; State v. Beckwith, 135 Me. 423 ; State v. Strout, 132 Me. 134 ; State v. Peterson, 136 Me. 165 , and Smith, Pet’r. v. State of Maine, 145 Me. 313 . | 1 | 1953–1953 |
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.