A decision in a recent reported question before the Maine SJC shows how far and fast the law has traveled on marriage equality.  Kinney v. Busch.

So here’s a difference between the motion practice in the Maine SJC and the First Circuit that I didn’t notice until now.

We have previously blogged on a Maine SJC decision rejecting an 80B appeal as untimely, with the Chief Justice in that case noting some problems and pitfalls under current law, and us noting a few more.  (Is your 80B clock ticking?)  Last Tuesday, the Court issued a decision rejecting an 80C appeal as untimely, so beware on that front as well.  (Bailey v. Dept. of Marine Resources, 2015 ME 128)

Per my recent blog, I attended the Maine Historical Society’s event honoring the Mills family (Dora, Janet, Paul and Peter), and, as anticipated, it was a delightful event.  If we were all as involved in our communities as each of these folks, the world would be a different (and better) place.  Dora Mills has even worked with Mother Theresa!

The latest (Summer 2015) edition of the Council of Appellate Lawyers’ Appellate Issues addresses a hot and important topic in appellate law – the record.  Or, more accurately, discusses the current assault on the record as we have traditionally known it.  This is a topic upon which I have blogged before (sometimes responding to Judge Posner’s views on the subject, whom I believe takes a rather liberal view of the need to color within the lines of established rules). 

The Maine SJC’s latest decision includes a ruling that could have fatal implications for some land use appeals.  Campbell v. City of South Portland, 2015 ME 125

The Maine SJC has asked for amici briefs in a pending appeal: http://www.courts.maine.gov/maine_courts/supreme/amicus_invites/me.html

The Maine SJC is on the move.  The newspaper says the Court will hold two sessions a year in Augusta and two in Bangor (Former Kennebec County Courthouse ready to host high court).  It does the Tour o’ Maine in October.  It only holds nine argument sessions a term according to their on-line calendar [http://www.courts.maine.gov/maine_courts/supreme/calendar.shtml], so this means that the Court will now spend a majority of their time on the road.  Back to riding the circuit? 

So as we say good-bye to summer (snif), let us note what’s coming up of interest in the next two months.

I’m back from hiking in Vermont (which was very Vermont-y), and eschewing the recent big decisions which speak for themselves (e.g., the Maine SJC’s answer to questions from the Governor on the veto process (2015 ME 107), let’s talk about two decisions, one SJC and one First Circuit, that piqued my interest:  First Tracks Investments, LLC v. Murray, Plumb & Murray, 2015 ME 104; and Clukey v. Town of Camden, No. 14-1264.