Maine Revised Statutes

Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 8, § 285-A (2026)

Bargaining agent

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ME-LEGlegislature.maine.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
(REPEALED)
SECTION HISTORY
PL 1997, c. 735, §6 (RAL). PL 1999, c. 482, §§6-8 (AMD). MRSA T. 8 §285-A, sub-§7 (RP).
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 1 case, 1999–1999 · leading case: Davric Maine Corp. v. Maine Harness Racing Comm'n, 1999 ME 99 (Me. 1999).
Davric Maine Corp. v. Maine Harness Racing Comm'n, 1999 ME 99 (Me. 1999). · cites it 4× “” 8 M.R.S.A. § 285-A(2) (Supp.1998). Specifically, the statute sets forth the following requirements for the election procedure: During each January preceding such an election, the commission, in consultation with the racetracks within each racing segment and in consultation…”
— Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 8, § 285-A(2) — 1 case
Davric Maine Corp. v. Maine Harness Racing Comm'n, 1999 ME 99 (Me. 1999). “” 8 M.R.S.A. § 285-A(2) (Supp.1998). Specifically, the statute sets forth the following requirements for the election procedure: During each January preceding such an election, the commission, in consultation with the racetracks within each racing segment and in consultation…”
— Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 8, § 285-A(3) — 1 case
Davric Maine Corp. v. Maine Harness Racing Comm'n, 1999 ME 99 (Me. 1999). “” 8 M.R.S.A. § 285-A(2) (Supp.1998). Specifically, the statute sets forth the following requirements for the election procedure: During each January preceding such an election, the commission, in consultation with the racetracks within each racing segment and in consultation…”
— Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 8, § 285-A(4) — 1 case
Davric Maine Corp. v. Maine Harness Racing Comm'n, 1999 ME 99 (Me. 1999). “” 8 M.R.S.A. § 285-A(2) (Supp.1998). Specifically, the statute sets forth the following requirements for the election procedure: During each January preceding such an election, the commission, in consultation with the racetracks within each racing segment and in consultation…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.