 |
|
 |
|
|
Access State and Federal Case Law, plus U.S. Supreme Court cases — for free!
Click on any of the case links below to view the full text of that case — for free — through lexisONE®, a legal research and news service from LexisNexis®. Login is required — registration is free!
While viewing the full text of the case, select from upgrade options to Shepardize® or view the fully-featured case on lexis.com including Core Terms, Shepard's® Signals, Case Summaries, Print Options, and more. lexisONE offers access to comprehensive content and flexible services for faster, more efficient legal research. Review our flexible LexisNexis® subscriptions offered through daily, weekly or monthly research packages.
| In re Matthew W., Docket: Pen-05-648,
SUPREME JUDICIAL COURT OF MAINE, June 12, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because a do not resuscitate directive issued by the Maine Department of Health and Human Services under Me. Rev. Stat. Ann. tit. 22, § 4037 without approval of the parents was tantamount to a termination of parental rights, the parents were entitled to, in part, a right to be heard and a clear and convincing standard of proof.
|
|||||
| SANBORN v. INHABITANTS OF SEBAGO, CIVIL ACTION Docket No. AP-05-39,
SUPERIOR COURT OF MAINE, CUMBERLAND COUNTY, June 12, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| STATE v. LUND, CRIMINAL ACTION DOCKET NO. CR-06-330,
SUPERIOR COURT OF MAINE, KENNEBEC COUNTY, June 12, 2006, Decided , June 12, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| THIBEAULT v. TOWN OF NEWFIELD, CIVIL ACTION DOCKET NO: AP-03-069,
SUPERIOR COURT OF MAINE, YORK COUNTY, June 12, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Williams v. Tyson's Food, Inc., Docket: WCB-05-323,
SUPREME JUDICIAL COURT OF MAINE, June 12, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: State's highest court deferred to hearing officer's ruling that employee's conduct did not deserve reduction or cessation of benefits was reasonable application of Me. Rev. Stat. Ann. tit. 39-A, § 214(1)(E) (2005) since employee was fired from post-injury job due to excessive lateness, caused by childcare difficulties.
|
|||||
| Carter v. Carter, Docket: Han-05-355,
SUPREME JUDICIAL COURT OF MAINE, June 13, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because the trial court considered all factors under Me. Rev. Stat. Ann. tit. 19-A, § 951-A, including the ex-husband's economic misconduct when it awarded the ex-wife, inter alia, income-producing property, personal property of substantially greater value, and $ 200 per week in spousal support, the judgment was affirmed.
|
|||||
| STATE OF MAINE vs. CHRISTOPHER SHUMWAY, Defendant, DOCKET NO. CR-05-075,
SUPERIOR COURT OF MAINE, AROOSTOOK COUNTY, June 14, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Flickinger v. Oakhurst Dairy, Docket: WCB-05-97,
SUPREME JUDICIAL COURT OF MAINE, June 15, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because an employee's workers' compensation award was for total incapacity benefits, made pursuant to a provision which did not contain any language regarding fault, there was no reason to invoke the fault provisions of Me. Rev. Stat. Ann. tit. 39-A, § 214 (2005) because that statute applied only when a claimant had partial work capacity.
|
|||||
| Mitchell v. Kieliszek, Docket: Oxf-04-535,
SUPREME JUDICIAL COURT OF MAINE, June 15, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a medical negligence case, a patient's questions did not seek a lay opinion under Me. R. Evid. 701. Because a nonparty physician had no recollection of ever seeing the patient's mammogram, the physician had no personal perceptions on which he could have based a lay opinion, and would have relied on his professional experience.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
