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.
7 Maine opinions name it 2 courts 1981–2018 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 |
|---|---|---|
Johnston v. Dow & Coulombe, Inc.green2 sentences2003Johnston, 686 A.2d at 1066 (explaining that the Court has limited the application of the discovery rule for accrual of causes of action “to three discrete areas: legal malpractice, foreign object and negligent diagnosis medical malpractice, and asbestosis”). *789 [¶ 23] However, we need not consider the application of a discovery rule exception here. 2000See Nevin, ¶25 at 699; see also Johnston, 686 A.2d at 1066-67 (declining to apply a discovery rule in an action against surveyors for negligent preparation of a survey); 12 cf. Bozzuto v. Ouellette, 408 A.2d 697, 699 (Me.1979) (“[I]gnorance of the defendant’s misfeasance for about seven years does nothing by itself to prevent the running of the statute of limitations.”). [¶ 15] Dunelawn finally contends that the statute of limitations should not be applied to implied warranty claims. | 2 | 2 |
Bozzuto v. Ouellettegreen2 sentences2000See Nevin, ¶25 at 699; see also Johnston, 686 A.2d at 1066-67 (declining to apply a discovery rule in an action against surveyors for negligent preparation of a survey); 12 cf. Bozzuto v. Ouellette, 408 A.2d 697, 699 (Me.1979) (“[I]gnorance of the defendant’s misfeasance for about seven years does nothing by itself to prevent the running of the statute of limitations.”). [¶ 15] Dunelawn finally contends that the statute of limitations should not be applied to implied warranty claims. 1981See Millett v. Dumais, Me., 365 A.2d 1038, 1042 (1976); Bozzuto v. Ouellette, supra, at 699. | 2 | 2 |
Anderson v. Nealgreen1 sentence2018See, e.g., 14 M.R.S.A. § 859 (fraudulent concealment of cause of action); 24 M.R.S. 2902 (discovery of "foreign objects" in body in medical malpractice action); Dunelawn Owners' Ass'n, 2000 ME 94 , ,i 14, 750 A.2d 591 (existence of fiduciary relationship between parties) ("Although the facts of this case present a difficult to discover breach, the absence of a fiduciary relationship in these facts prevents the application of the discovery rule"); Anderson v. Neal, 428 A.2d 1189, 1192 (Me. 1981) (in legal malpractice actions, where "reliance placed upon the attorney by the client and the lack o | 1 | 1 |
Robinson v. Weavergreen1 sentence1988See Robinson v. Weaver, 550 S.W. 2d 18, 21-22 (Tex.1977). | 1 | 1 |
Millett v. Dumaisgreen2 sentences1981See Millett v. Dumais, Me., 365 A.2d 1038, 1042 (1976); Bozzuto v. Ouellette, supra, at 699. 1981See Millett v. Dumais, Me., 365 A.2d 1038, 1042 (1976); Bozzuto v. Ouellette, supra, at 699. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Maine. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Dunelawn Owners' Ass'n v. Gendreau
green
2 sentences2018See, e.g., 14 M.R.S.A. § 859 (fraudulent concealment of cause of action); 24 M.R.S. 2902 (discovery of "foreign objects" in body in medical malpractice action); Dunelawn Owners' Ass'n, 2000 ME 94 , ,i 14, 750 A.2d 591 (existence of fiduciary relationship between parties) ("Although the facts of this case present a difficult to discover breach, the absence of a fiduciary relationship in these facts prevents the application of the discovery rule"); Anderson v. Neal, 428 A.2d 1189, 1192 (Me. 1981) (in legal malpractice actions, where "reliance placed upon the attorney by the client and the lack o 2018See, e.g., 14 M.R.S.A. § 859 (fraudulent concealment of cause of action); 24 M.R.S. 2902 (discovery of "foreign objects" in body in medical malpractice action); Dunelawn Owners' Ass'n, 2000 ME 94 , ,i 14, 750 A.2d 591 (existence of fiduciary relationship between parties) ("Although the facts of this case present a difficult to discover breach, the absence of a fiduciary relationship in these facts prevents the application of the discovery rule"); Anderson v. Neal, 428 A.2d 1189, 1192 (Me. 1981) (in legal malpractice actions, where "reliance placed upon the attorney by the client and the lack o | 1 | 2018–2018 |
Nevin v. Union Trust Co.
green
2 sentences2000The significance of the fiduciary relationship to the application of the discovery rule was reiterated most recently in Nevin, 1999 ME 47, ¶ 30 , 726 A.2d at 700 , in which we applied the discovery rule to claims against a fiduciary providing financial management services. 2000The significance of the fiduciary relationship to the application of the discovery rule was reiterated most recently in Nevin, 1999 ME 47, ¶ 30 , 726 A.2d at 700 , in which we applied the discovery rule to claims against a fiduciary providing financial management services. | 1 | 2000–2000 |
Bolton v. Caine
green
2 sentences1988However, in Bolton , we declined to make the application of the discovery rule “solely dependent on the type of evidence that may be produced at trial.” 541 A.2d at 926 . 1988Bolton, 541 A.2d at 925-26 . | 1 | 1988–1988 |
Tantish v. Szendey
green
2 sentences1983In weighing the retroactivity vel non of its decision to overrule Tantish v. Szendey, 158 Me. 228 , 182 A.2d 660 (1962), the Myrick Court confronted complex principles of the judicial process. 1983In weighing the retroactivity vel non of its decision to overrule Tantish v. Szendey, 158 Me. 228 , 182 A.2d 660 (1962), the Myrick Court confronted complex principles of the judicial process. | 1 | 1983–1983 |
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.