Litigation

This week the Judiciary Committee voted unanimously to recommend the reappoint of the Honorable Leigh Ingalls Saufley to a third term on the Maine Supreme Judicial Court.  She was first nominated to the SJC in 1997 by Gov. Angus King, an Independent.  She was confirmed as Chief Justice in 2001 (the first female CJ), and reappointed in 2009 by Governor Baldacci, a Democrat.  She has now been nominated for reappointment by Governor Le Page, a Republican.

If only it were this easy with the Supreme Court in Washington.

Per our last blog, now let’s take a look at what’s doing in the First Circuit.  There are two decisions issued by the CTA1 coming from Maine last month, and both are worth discussion.

Let’s take a look at what the Maine Supreme Judicial Court’s been up to recently.

If you have lived in Maine for any length of time, you remember that in 1979, the Maine Indians claimed 2/3s of the State of Maine. The end result was a settlement, embodied in federal and state statutes, that among other things, gave the tribes federal recognition and $80 million, and set forth reservation boundaries.  In an action in which we represented a coalition of municipalities and other users of the Penobscot River, the federal district court confirmed that the Penobscot Reservation does not include, as the Tribe recently claimed, the 60-mile main stem of the Penobscot River.  (Order on Cross-Motions for Summary Judgment, Order on the Pending Motions of State Intervenors) 

The Maine SJC issued a decision in November in a civil rights case consistent with a line of authority in which the result appears right to me, but the way the Court gets there makes me scratch my head.  Marshall v. Town of Dexter, 2015 ME 135

The latest Maine Bar Journal (Fall 2015) has been issued, and included is another set of Judge Hornby’s “Fables” – short lessons in the Aesop mode.  These are always enjoyable, thought provoking, and helpful.  There are a few this time relevant to appellate practice.

I was perusing recent First Circuit decisions and noticed one that ordered a remand to a different district court judge.  U.S. v. Figueroa-Ocasio (Oct. 16, 2016).  This is unusual, and got me wondering whether there is any pattern that can be found in these determinations, either in that court or the Maine SJC.

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!