In Board of Overseers v. Brown, the Law Court addressed the timeliness of an appeal following a “motion for clarification” of a judgment. In doing so, the Law Court drew an interesting distinction between requests for relief that qualify as a motion to alter or amend the judgment under Rule 59(e) (which toll the
Maine Appeals
Latest from Maine Appeals
Beware the Deadline: Pending Motions and Entry of Final Judgment
The Law Court’s decision in Fournier v. Flats Industrial, Inc., issued last week, provides a stark reminder of the importance of attention to the deadlines for filing an appeal of a final judgment. The Law Court treats the deadline as jurisdictional, and requires “strict compliance”—even when, as in Fournier, the trial court may not…
Appellate Preservation and Summary Judgment
The necessity of preserving issues for appeal can be a trap for the unwary, leaving litigants without recourse if they fail to take proper steps to preserve a particular argument. Near the end of its recent term, the Supreme Court made this requirement slightly less fraught. In Dupree v. Younger, the Court clarified that…
Keeping Form Subservient to Substance in Rule 80B (and 80C) Actions
What is the proper remedy when a party challenges a municipal action under Rule 80B, but the court later determines that this was the wrong procedural vehicle to challenge the municipal action? In Hurricane Island Foundation v. Town of Vinalhaven, the Law Court took a pragmatic approach by treating the proceeding as a declaratory…
Standing, Cross-Appeals, and Rule 80B
Maine law regarding cross-appeals has long been murky, and as a result that subject has often been the subject of commentary both at this blog (here and here, for instance) and elsewhere. The Law Court brought additional clarity in this area of the law in its recent decision in Tominsky v. Town of…
Due Process, Retroactive Laws, and Vested Rights in Development Projects
Last week marked the close of a major legal dispute under Maine law regarding the applicability of retroactive laws to development projects already under construction. The issue in the case was one of fundamental fairness: if a person obtains a lawful permit and then expends significant sums building a project based on that permit, can…
You Should Be Respectful (But You Don’t Have to Be)
In an interesting parallel to the developments in the Maine Law Court that indicate a revival of state constitutional interpretation, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court issued a noteworthy opinion examining the protections granted to free speech under the Commonwealth’s constitution.
The case, Barron v. Kolenda, involved a town ordinance requiring all comments in public…
Respect the Process: Late Appeals and Wrongful Use of Civil Proceedings
Last week the Law Court handed down two decisions relating to judicial process, addressing the time limits for notices of appeal and the situations in which relief can be sought for wrongful use of civil proceedings.
In the first case, Witham v. Board of Trustees of the Maine Criminal Justice Academy, a petitioner challenging…
Is It Appropriate to Defer to Agency Interpretations under the Maine Constitution?
The issue of whether courts should defer to an executive agency’s interpretation of a statute is a familiar one. Going back all the way to Marbury v. Madison, we know that courts decide the meaning of a statute. Courts therefore routinely decide how to interpret ambiguous statutes. But what happens when a statute is…
District of Maine Judicial Conference
I had the opportunity to attend the District of Maine Judicial Conference earlier this week, and it did not disappoint. It was the first one held in four years given the pandemic, and it was great to hear from practitioners and judges in person. My partner Nolan Reichl, along with Valerie Wicks, moderated a…