Proposed Amendments to Maine Rules of Appellate Procedure
Pierce Atwood | Maine Appeals Blog
by
1w ago
The Appellate Rules Committee, of which I am currently chair, has been busy considering various amendments to the rules. The Committee has recommended certain changes, and the Supreme Judicial Court has now proposed amendments to the rules and invited public comment. The biggest change is one that will hopefully be a significant benefit to attorneys appearing before the Law Court: the proposed rules would require most documents to be filed and served electronically.  With the advent of a uniform electronic filing system across Maine courts still an elusive goal, the proposed rules would a ..read more
Visit website
Procedure, Not Politics
Pierce Atwood | Maine Appeals Blog
by
1M ago
Amid the intense coverage of the Colorado ballot exclusion case that was the subject of oral argument before the Supreme Court earlier this month, the Law Court’s decision in Trump v. Secretary of State on a parallel appeal of the Maine Secretary of State’s decision to bar Donald Trump from the ballot has garnered comparatively little notice.  The Law Court’s decision has flown under the radar because it does not reach the merits of the meaning and application of the Fourteenth Amendment, but instead turns on appellate procedure. Procedure matters, however, and the decision raises an inte ..read more
Visit website
When Should Prior Precedent Be Overruled?
Pierce Atwood | Maine Appeals Blog
by
2M ago
With debates over the application of stare decisis taking center stage in recent Supreme Cout arguments regarding the viability of Chevron deference—an issue which we will likely revisit in June—it was notable that the Law Court recently engaged in its own heated debate over that doctrine in Finch v. U.S. Bank, N.A. I recently blogged about the substance of that decision. Today, we take a look at the court’s discussion of stare decisis. The doctrine of stare decisis, as the court noted, is a judge-made doctrine designed to create stability in the law and enable the public to reasonably rely on ..read more
Visit website
A Conversation on Appellate Practice
Pierce Atwood | Maine Appeals Blog
by
3M ago
I have the distinct honor of participating in a CLE on Monday, December 11, at 4p, with two excellent jurists: Justice Catherine Connors of the Maine Supreme Judicial Court, and Justice William Meade of the Massachusetts Appeals Court. The CLE is being moderated by Dan Winslow of the New England Legal Foundation. Feel free to join us for this conversation – it should be an enlightening, and hopefully enjoyable, way to complete some CLE before the end of the year. More information and a link to register can be found at this link. I hope to see you there ..read more
Visit website
The Limits of Deference to Agency Interpretations under Maine Law
Pierce Atwood | Maine Appeals Blog
by
4M ago
Earlier this month, the Maine Law Court issued its decision in Cassidy Holdings, LLC v. Aroostook County Commissioners, holding that, in a municipality without a board of assessment review, a taxpayer whose nonresidential property is valued at $1 million or more has the option to appeal an assessment either to the county commissioners or to the State Board of Property Tax Review. The decision has been described by my excellent colleagues, Jon Block and Olga Goldberg.  For purposes of this blog, it is noteworthy that that Cassidy Holdings took up an issue of broad application: the extent o ..read more
Visit website
(Precedent) Singing in Harmony
Pierce Atwood | Maine Appeals Blog
by
5M ago
The Law Court recently cleaned up a tangle of legal precedent regarding the appropriate means for challenging a property tax assessment, explaining and harmonizing two hundred years of case law.  Oakes v. Town of Richmond establishes clear guidelines for tax appeals. The issue in Oakes was the proper procedural vehicle for contesting a property tax that a taxpayer claims should not have been assessed at all.  In that case, a taxpayer had challenged a tax assessment based on an argument that she did not own the subject property.  The Superior Court dismissed the claim, concluding ..read more
Visit website
The Primacy Doctrine and Appellate Advocacy
Pierce Atwood | Maine Appeals Blog
by
6M ago
As readers of this blog know, state constitutional interpretation has been a matter of discussion here and at the Maine Law Court over the last few years.  Maine jurisprudence has seen a revival of the primacy doctrine, which directs state courts to resolve state constitutional issues prior to and independently of any federal constitutional issues.  This revival has, in turn, highlighted the need for lawyers to engage in the advocacy necessary to enable the Law Court to engage in meaningful state constitutional analysis. This is the issue that the Law Court took up in its most recent ..read more
Visit website
Beware the Appeal Deadline, Part 2: Motions to Amend a Judgment v. Motions for Relief from Judgment
Pierce Atwood | Maine Appeals Blog
by
6M ago
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 appeal deadline) and those that are categorized as a motion for relief from judgment under Rule 60(b) (which do not toll the appeal deadline).  This distinction poses potential traps for the unwary. Brown involved a bar complaint against an attorney for violations of the Mai ..read more
Visit website
Beware the Deadline: Pending Motions and Entry of Final Judgment
Pierce Atwood | Maine Appeals Blog
by
8M ago
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 have yet resolved all pending motions before entry of final judgment. In Fournier, after the Superior Court granted a motion to dismiss two of three counts in the plaintiffs’ complaint, the plaintiffs filed a stipulation voluntarily dismissing the final count ..read more
Visit website
Appellate Preservation and Summary Judgment
Pierce Atwood | Maine Appeals Blog
by
9M ago
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 a party who wishes to preserve for appeal a purely legal issue resolved at summary judgment need not raise the issue anew in a post-trial motion. A quick background primer.  In 2011, the Supreme Court held in Ortiz v. Jordan that an order denying summary judgm ..read more
Visit website

Follow Pierce Atwood | Maine Appeals Blog on FeedSpot

Continue with Google
Continue with Apple
OR