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.
6 Maine opinions name it 1 courts 1995–2022 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 |
|---|---|---|
Searle v. Town of Bucksportgreen2 sentences2022See Searle, 2010 ME 89, ¶ 42 , 3 A.3d 390 (Jabar, J., dissenting) (“The Legislature enacted the MTCA to afford citizens a remedy to which they otherwise would not be entitled due to sovereign immunity.”); Rodriguez v. Town of Moose River, 2007 ME 68 , ¶ 34 n.4, 922 A.2d 484 (“The Legislature created the narrow exceptions to governmental immunity under the assumption that governmental entities would acquire insurance to cover liability for claims outside immunity protection . . . .”). 2022See Searle, 2010 ME 89, ¶ 42 , 3 A.3d 390 (Jabar, J., dissenting) (“The Legislature enacted the MTCA to afford citizens a remedy to which they otherwise would not be entitled due to sovereign immunity.”); Rodriguez v. Town of Moose River, 2007 ME 68 , ¶ 34 n.4, 922 A.2d 484 (“The Legislature created the narrow exceptions to governmental immunity under the assumption that governmental entities would acquire insurance to cover liability for claims outside immunity protection . . . .”). | 1 | 1 |
Sargent v. Buckleygreen2 sentences1999See Sargent v. Buckley, 1997 ME 159, ¶ 10 , 697 A.2d 1272, 1275 . [¶ 4] The MTCA provides immunity to all governmental entities from suit on all tort claims seeking recovery for damages, “except as otherwise expressly provided by statute.” See 14 M.R.S.A. §§ 8103-8104-A. Section 8104-A provides the exceptions to governmental immunity at issue in this case: [A] governmental entity is liable for property damage, bodily injury or death in the following instances. 1. 1999See Sargent v. Buckley, 1997 ME 159, ¶ 10 , 697 A.2d 1272, 1275 . [¶ 4] The MTCA provides immunity to all governmental entities from suit on all tort claims seeking recovery for damages, “except as otherwise expressly provided by statute.” See 14 M.R.S.A. §§ 8103-8104-A. Section 8104-A provides the exceptions to governmental immunity at issue in this case: [A] governmental entity is liable for property damage, bodily injury or death in the following instances. 1. | 1 | 1 |
Lovejoy v. Stategreen1 sentence1995Lovejoy v. State, 544 A.2d 750, 751 (Me.1988); Darling, 535 A.2d at 424 . | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Maine. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Rodriguez v. Town of Moose River
green
2 sentences2022See Searle, 2010 ME 89, ¶ 42 , 3 A.3d 390 (Jabar, J., dissenting) (“The Legislature enacted the MTCA to afford citizens a remedy to which they otherwise would not be entitled due to sovereign immunity.”); Rodriguez v. Town of Moose River, 2007 ME 68 , ¶ 34 n.4, 922 A.2d 484 (“The Legislature created the narrow exceptions to governmental immunity under the assumption that governmental entities would acquire insurance to cover liability for claims outside immunity protection . . . .”). 2022See Searle, 2010 ME 89, ¶ 42 , 3 A.3d 390 (Jabar, J., dissenting) (“The Legislature enacted the MTCA to afford citizens a remedy to which they otherwise would not be entitled due to sovereign immunity.”); Rodriguez v. Town of Moose River, 2007 ME 68 , ¶ 34 n.4, 922 A.2d 484 (“The Legislature created the narrow exceptions to governmental immunity under the assumption that governmental entities would acquire insurance to cover liability for claims outside immunity protection . . . .”). | 3 | 2009–2022 |
Petillo v. City of Portland
green
1 sentence1996Id. at 327 . | 1 | 1996–1996 |
Darling v. Augusta Mental Health Institute
green
1 sentence1995Lovejoy v. State, 544 A.2d 750, 751 (Me.1988); Darling, 535 A.2d at 424 . | 1 | 1995–1995 |
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.