April 28, 2016 / June 15, 2016 by mindgrub
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/
Read more »
April 26, 2016 / June 15, 2016 by mindgrub
So we had a little hiatus from blogging because I was teaching a class at the U. of Maine Law School. That teaching exercise was, using technical lingo, a Giant Time Suck. My hats off to anyone and everyone in education who do this year after year. Phew!
March 14, 2016 / June 15, 2016 by mindgrub
It’s been a while since we’ve discussed what’s been happening at the First Circuit vis-à-vis- Maine, so here’s an update. Nothing too spectacular on the Maine front decision-wise, but the Court is offering a free seminar, with one session in April in Boston, and one in May in Portland, on criminal appellate practice in the First Circuit. They do something like this every five years or so. I went to the last one and it was very good. While most of the schedule is focused on issues of only criminal appellate interest, the beginning of the day has Judge Kayatta speaking, followed by another speaker on issues of generic appellate interest. It’s free and you get CLE (although not ethics, which seems odd, since David Beneman is talking about that for a half-hour). http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/news/federal-criminal-appellate-practice-seminar-0
March 11, 2016 / June 15, 2016 by mindgrub
The Attorney General recently issued an opinion on the constitutionality of proposed legislation to adopt ranked voting, noting that the proposed law presents serious constitutional issues. https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B3PYp5sROj_1RGNBUldIelk0T1lHVTZ1UTRrSkU3eHZtdFZJ/view?pref=2&pli=1. The problem is that the relevant provision in the Maine Constitution refers to vote by a “plurality,” which suggested that you pick the candidate with the most votes and end there.
March 10, 2016 / June 15, 2016 by mindgrub
Things are hopping on the appellate practice front in Maine. Last month the Maine SJC announced it was creating an advisory committee for the Maine Rules of Appellate Procedure, and on May 20, the SJC will be giving a CLE on Appellate Practice before the Court. (Appellate Practice Before the Maine Supreme Judicial Court (PRACPRO)
March 8, 2016 / June 15, 2016 by mindgrub
On Feb. 29, the Supreme Court heard argument in Williams v. Pennsylvania, a case presenting two issues: (1) should one of the judges hearing the capital case appeal have recused himself due to involvement at the trial level; and, if so (2) what’s the proper remedy, if any, if the majority vote on appeal would remain a majority even excluding that judge’s vote. We’re looking at Q #2 today.
February 19, 2016 / June 15, 2016 by mindgrub
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.
January 25, 2016 / June 15, 2016 by mindgrub
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.
January 22, 2016 / June 15, 2016 by mindgrub
Let’s take a look at what the Maine Supreme Judicial Court’s been up to recently.
December 17, 2015 / June 15, 2016 by mindgrub
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)
