7 Maine opinions name it 1 courts 1960–2021 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 |
|---|---|---|
Crosby v. Town of Belgradegreen2 sentences2008However, in Quiñón, we held, as we previously had, that collaterally attacking a judgment for lack of subject matter jurisdiction is allowed only if there is "manifest abuse of authority, substantial infringement of the authority of another tribunal, or a need to entertain a belated challenge as a matter of procedural fairness.” Id. at 1296 (quoting Crosby v. Town of Belgrade, 562 A.2d 1228, 1230 (Me. 1989)). 2008However, in Quirion, we held, as we previously had, that collaterally attacking a judgment for lack of subject matter jurisdiction is allowed only if there is "manifest abuse of authority, substantial infringement of the authority of another tribunal, or a need to entertain a belated challenge as a matter of procedural fairness." Id. at 1296 (quoting Crosby v. Town of Belgrade, 562 A.2d 1228, 1230 (Me. 1989)). | 2 | 2 |
State v. Truegreen1 sentence1984See State v. True, 438 A.2d 460, 468 (Me.1981) (“trial counsel’s failure to object ... will itself be a consideration in determining whether the error is obvious and highly prejudicial”). | 1 | 1 |
Thursby v. Stategreen1 sentence1977See Thursby, supra, at page 66. *1086 Counsel initially has the responsibility of raising the question of incompetence of the defendant to stand sentencing by bringing to the attention of the court such facts in his possession tending to show that the defendant was then incapable of understanding the nature and object of the sentencing proceedings and was unable to cooperate with him for the presentation of a meaningful allocution to the court. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Maine. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
State v. Thompson
green
2 sentences2021Our decision today is also consistent with our prior determinations that a judgment may be subject to collateral attack for lack of subject matter jurisdiction when “there is ‘manifest abuse of authority, substantial infringement of the authority of another tribunal, or a need to entertain a belated challenge as a matter of procedural fairness.’” State v. Thompson, 2008 ME 166 , ¶ 19 n.8, 958 A.2d 887 (quoting Quirion v. Pub. 2021Our decision today is also consistent with our prior determinations that a judgment may be subject to collateral attack for lack of subject matter jurisdiction when “there is ‘manifest abuse of authority, substantial infringement of the authority of another tribunal, or a need to entertain a belated challenge as a matter of procedural fairness.’” State v. Thompson, 2008 ME 166 , ¶ 19 n.8, 958 A.2d 887 (quoting Quirion v. Pub. | 1 | 2021–2021 |
Quirion v. Public Utilities Commission
green
2 sentences2008However, in Quiñón, we held, as we previously had, that collaterally attacking a judgment for lack of subject matter jurisdiction is allowed only if there is "manifest abuse of authority, substantial infringement of the authority of another tribunal, or a need to entertain a belated challenge as a matter of procedural fairness.” Id. at 1296 (quoting Crosby v. Town of Belgrade, 562 A.2d 1228, 1230 (Me. 1989)). 2008However, in Quirion, we held, as we previously had, that collaterally attacking a judgment for lack of subject matter jurisdiction is allowed only if there is "manifest abuse of authority, substantial infringement of the authority of another tribunal, or a need to entertain a belated challenge as a matter of procedural fairness." Id. at 1296 (quoting Crosby v. Town of Belgrade, 562 A.2d 1228, 1230 (Me. 1989)). | 1 | 2008–2008 |
Marsella v. Bath Iron Works Corp.
green
1 sentence1991Cf. Marsella v. Bath Iron Works Corp., 585 A.2d 802 , 803-04 & n. 4 (1991) (early-pay system tries to avoid lawyer involvement before the informal hearing on a notice of controversy). | 1 | 1991–1991 |
Garbouska Case
neutral
1 sentence1960Smith v. Boiler Company, 119 Maine, 552 ---” In 1925 in the Garbouska Case, 124 Me. 404, 405 , a belated claim was disallowed and this court said: “---It is not open for the Commission to award compensation in magnanimous indifference to restrictive law. | 1 | 1960–1960 |
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.