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 2008–2022 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 |
|---|---|---|
Lindemann v. Commission on Governmental Ethics and Election Practicesgreen2 sentences2018Id. ¶ 9 n.2 ; see Lindemann v. Comm'n on Governmental Ethics & Election Practices , 2008 ME 187 , ¶ 8, 961 A.2d 538 ("[T]he question of whether a specific individual has standing is significantly affected by the unique context of the claim."). 2018Id. ¶ 9 n.2 ; see Lindemann v. Comm'n on Governmental Ethics & Election Practices , 2008 ME 187 , ¶ 8, 961 A.2d 538 ("[T]he question of whether a specific individual has standing is significantly affected by the unique context of the claim."). | 1 | 5 |
State v. Ayersgreen1 sentence2015If the motion to suppress asserts a violation of the Fourth Amendment, “the defendant must demonstrate that his own reasonable expectation of privacy was violated by the action of the State.” State v. Maloney, 1998 ME 56, ¶6 , 708 A.2d 277 (emphasis added); see also State v. Ayers, 464 A.2d 963, 968 (Me.1983). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Maine. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Roop v. City of Belfast
green
2 sentences2022"In addition, the question of whether a specific individual has standing is significantly affected by the unique context of the claim." Id. 2008Id. [¶ 9] In the context of an administrative decision, as is the case here, the right to judicial review is governed by statute. | 2 | 2008–2022 |
Sanborn v. Sanborn
green
2 sentences2020Lindemann v. Comm’n on Governmental Ethics & Election Pracs., 2008 ME 187, ¶ 8 , 961 A.2d 538 (citation and quotation marks omitted). 4 will entertain an appeal.” Sanborn v. Sanborn, 2005 ME 95, ¶ 4 , 877 A.2d 1075 . 2020Lindemann v. Comm’n on Governmental Ethics & Election Pracs., 2008 ME 187, ¶ 8 , 961 A.2d 538 (citation and quotation marks omitted). 4 will entertain an appeal.” Sanborn v. Sanborn, 2005 ME 95, ¶ 4 , 877 A.2d 1075 . | 1 | 2020–2020 |
State v. Maloney
green
2 sentences2015If the motion to suppress asserts a violation of the Fourth Amendment, “the defendant must demonstrate that his own reasonable expectation of privacy was violated by the action of the State.” State v. Maloney, 1998 ME 56, ¶6 , 708 A.2d 277 (emphasis added); see also State v. Ayers, 464 A.2d 963, 968 (Me.1983). 2015If the motion to suppress asserts a violation of the Fourth Amendment, “the defendant must demonstrate that his own reasonable expectation of privacy was violated by the action of the State.” State v. Maloney, 1998 ME 56, ¶6 , 708 A.2d 277 (emphasis added); see also State v. Ayers, 464 A.2d 963, 968 (Me.1983). | 1 | 2015–2015 |