About

With the launch of this blog, we seek to discuss issues relating to appeals and appellate law in Maine, including the activities and decisions of the Maine Supreme Judicial Court and First Circuit Court of Appeals relevant to Maine, and other participants in the Maine appellate community.

Public prescriptive easements AGAIN?

Practice area:

The Law Court has addressed the issue of public prescriptive easements again in Cedar Beach/Cedar Island Supporters, Inc., et al. v. Gables Real Estate LLC, 2016 ME 114.  As with its earlier decision in the Goose Rocks case (Almeder v. Town of Kennebunkport, 2014 ME 139, P18) – upon which we have blogged multiple times (Goose Rock mystery, Goose Rocks again, Back in the saddle, More about agency deference; looming arguments; and youtube, Goose Rocks, muskets and takings law, Goose Rocks Response, Goose Rocks redux – hold the phone!) the decision in Cedar Beach shows a sensitivity to ensuring that owners of land used by the public are not easily deemed to have lost their right to stop that access through longstanding public use.

Here, members of the public

What’s certifiable?

Practice area:

It may be the height of summer vacation time, but the Law Court and First Circuit continue to issue decisions, some of note.  Here’s one of interest, in which Judge Lynch parted ways with the reasoning of the majority (Judge Lipez, joined by CJ Howard):  Ms. S. v. Regional School Unit 72, No. 15-1487 (1st Cir. July 15, 2016).

The underlying subject matter is the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) and its interface with a Maine regulation regarding the timing for seeking a due process hearing under IDEA.  But the discussion is all about Maine procedural requirements for rulemaking under the Maine Administrative Procedure Act.

I will spare you the majority’s long discussion of its interpretation (the ruling is a remand for the district court to try again to figure out the answer to the ultimate question whether the rule passed muster or is invalid.)  I also won’t go into the labrynthian and confusing nature of the

SJC appellate seminar (III)

Practice area:

As you can see, we have a new format/platform. Let’s hope it’s easier to use that the last one.  As always, all comments welcome, cconnors@pierceatwood.com.  Now let’s finish discussing the SJC’s appellate seminar.

We had just finished up with Justices Alexander and Humphrey on jurisdictional issues. Next, Justice Mead spoke about Rules 5-7 on the brief and appendix structure.  After observing that the people attending probably weren’t the offenders, Justice Mead stated that sometimes it appears that attorneys hand off appeals to a junior associate or secretary, who in turn calls the clerk’s office for questions answered in the rules.  If you are the supervising attorney, he said, then supervise.  You should know the rules, and the buck stops with you.

Regarding Rule 9(a) and the standard of review, Justice Mead said this is not the portion of the brief to exercise your advocacy skills. Just set out the standard.

Do not seek to enlarge your page limit simultaneously with filing an

Peter DeTroy, appellate lawyer

Uncategorized
Practice area:

I shall return to my download of the Law Court’s appellate seminar, but first I wanted to weigh in on the recent passing of Peter DeTroy.  Many people have justly noted that he was the consummate trial lawyer.  Let’s take a moment to talk about his appellate talents, too.

SJC appellate seminar (I)

Uncategorized
Practice area:

As we alerted was coming in previous blogs, the Maine SJC held its seminar on appellate issues last Friday.  There were 100 registrants and the conference, with all 7 Justices participating, was chock-a-block with useful material.  Here’s a start on summarizing.

Alan DuBois on briefing

Uncategorized
Practice area:

Following up on my last entry, here is the download from Alan DuBois, the First Assistant Public Defender of the District of North Carolina (so he spoke from the criminal defense perspective and how to draft the appellant brief).  His presentation was excellent and thought provoking, in part because he spoke against conventional wisdom.  Here are some nuggets I found useful:

Oral argument – the fundamentals

Uncategorized
Practice area:

There has been much publicity about the clubbiness of the US Supreme Court, including how, if you want your cert petition granted, you’d better have the signature of one of the handful of folks they like to hear argue on the petition.  These are the Lucky Few who (1) went to Harvard or Yale; (2) clerked for a Supreme Court Justice; and (3) then typically went to the Solicitor General’s office for a few years before hitting the Supreme Court boutiques.  See http://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/scotus/