District Court for the District of Maine Court Cases

Search
  1. United States v. Douglas (2010)

    Congress enacted the Fair Sentencing Act of 2010 to "restore fairness to Federal cocaine sentencing."[1] Its most notable provision increases the amount of crack cocaine necessary to trigger mandatory five- and ten-year sentences. That change will reduce the current dramatic disparity in mandatory crack cocaine and powder cocaine sentences.


    Court: District Court for the District of Maine Docket: Criminal No. 09-202-P-H
  2. United States v. Butts (1986)

    "To deny a defendant the right to tell his story from the stand dehumanizes the administration of justice. I cannot accept a decision that allows a jury to condemn to death or imprisonment a defendant who desires to speak, without ever having heard the sound of his voice." Wright v. Estelle, 572 F.2d 1071 at 1078 (5th Cir.1978) (Godbold, J., dissenting).

    Court: District Court for the District of Maine Docket: Crim. No. 85-00029-P
  3. Women's Community Health Ctr., Inc. v. Cohen (1979)

    Roy Lucas, Lynn I. Miller, Louis R. Stern, Lucas & Miller, Washington, D. C., Cushman D. Anthony, William H. Howison, Anthony, Howison & Hayden, Portland, Me., for plaintiffs in No. 79-162 P.


    Court: District Court for the District of Maine Docket: Civ. Nos. 79-162 P, 79-165 P
  4. United States v. Booker (2008)

    After the Supreme Court's decision in District of Columbia v. Heller, the Court concludes that the law prohibiting persons who have been convicted of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence survives Second Amendment scrutiny.[1]


    Court: District Court for the District of Maine Docket: CR-08-19-B-W
  5. Curran v. PORTLAND SUPER. SCH. COMMITTEE, ETC. (1977)

    Carole B. Curran, a female employee in the Portland School System, has filed this action against the City of Portland; the Portland Superintending School Committee; Linda E. Abromson, Edith S. Beaulieu, Arthur M. Burton, Jr., Selvin Hirshon, Ira E. Kemp, Clifford A. Richardson, Joyce Rogers, Mary Sottery and H. Gordon Crowley, all present or former members of the School Committee; Harold Raynolds, Jr., the present Superintendent of the Portland School System; Clyde Bartlett, the present [...]

    Court: District Court for the District of Maine Docket: Civ. No. 75-27-SD
  6. American Employ. Ins. Co. v. DeLorme Pub. Co. (1999)

    This declaratory judgment action was brought by a counterclaim defendant's liability insurer seeking a declaration that it had no duty to defend against the trademark infringement counterclaim brought by one of the counterclaim defendant's competitors. The central issue is whether the facts alleged in the underlying trademark infringement counterclaim constitute an "advertising injury" which would trigger a duty to defend under a commercial general liability policy. More specifically, presently [...]

    Court: District Court for the District of Maine Docket: Civ. 98-179-P-C
  7. In Re New Motor Vehicles Canadian Export Antitrust Litigation (2004)

    Buyers and lessees[1] of new motor vehicles have sued automobile companies and two national dealer associations. They claim that these defendants conspired among themselves and with unnamed dealers to prevent less-expensive Canadian vehicles from entering the American market. This conduct, they contend, foreclosed a discount distribution channel and caused new vehicle prices in the United States to rise to artificially high levels. I ruled previously that these consumers can seek injunctive [...]

    Court: District Court for the District of Maine Docket: MDL DOCKET NO. 1532
  8. Burgess v. M/V Tamano (1973)

    Plaintiffs in these class actions seek to recover damages incurred as a result of the discharge into the waters of Casco Bay of approximately 100,000 gallons of Bunker C oil from the tanker M/V TAMANO early on the morning of July 22, 1972, when she struck an outcropping of "Soldier Ledge" while passing through Hussey Sound en route to the port of Portland. Variously named as defendants or third-party defendants are the TAMANO, her owners, her captain, her pilot and the local pilots' [...]

    Court: District Court for the District of Maine Docket: Civ. Nos. 13-111 and 13-156, 13-115, 13-120
  9. Lincoln Pulp & Paper Co., Inc. v. Dravo Corp. (1977)

    Ralph I. Lancaster, Ernest J. Babcock, Jotham D. Pierce, Jr., Portland, Me., William V. Kane, Allan Tupper Brown, Washington, D. C., Howard H. Dana, Jr., John W. Philbrick, Portland, Me., for defendant and third-party plaintiff.


    Court: District Court for the District of Maine Docket: Civ. No. 74-65-ND
  10. Stuart v. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co. (1987)

    Plaintiffs Stuart[1] and Danis brought suit to challenge the recoupment of benefits by Defendant Metropolitan Life Insurance Company (Metropolitan) in an amount equal to retroactive lump-sum Social Security payments received by each Plaintiff. Jurisdiction is invoked pursuant to 29 U.S.C. § 1132 (1982), 28 U.S.C. § 1331 (1982), and 28 U.S.C. § 1332 (1982). Because the two cases involve nearly identical questions of fact and identical questions of law, the cases have been consolidated for all [...]

    Court: District Court for the District of Maine Docket: Civ. Nos. 85-0318 P, 85-0388 P
  11. Gunter v. Merchants Warren National Bank (1973)

    These two cases present the identical question of whether the provisions of Chapter 507 of Title 14, M.R.S.A. (14 M.R.S.A. § 4451 et seq.) and Rule 4A of the Maine Rules of Civil Procedure, insofar as they permit the prejudgment attachment of real estate without prior notice and hearing, violate the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. Plaintiffs have brought the actions under the Civil Rights Act, 42 U. S.C. § 1983, seeking injunctive relief, [...]

    Court: District Court for the District of Maine Docket: Civ. Nos. 13-117, 14-20
  12. Saco Def. Sys. Div., Maremont Corp. v. Weinberger (1985)

    Plaintiffs have filed a Complaint for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief alleging that defendants acted in violation of Federal Acquisition Regulations in evaluating their bid for the contract to produce 9mm hand guns for the Army. The Complaint seeks preliminary and permanent injunctive relief. Plaintiffs have also filed with the Complaint a Motion for Expedited Discovery and a Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order. The Court declined to act on the motion for a Temporary Restraining Order ex [...]

    Court: District Court for the District of Maine Docket: Civ. No. 85-0082-P
  13. Petit v. Fessenden (1995)

    In this Chapter 11 case, the Debtor-Appellant Catherine Duffy Petit ("Debtor") brings an appeal seeking reversal of the Order Sustaining Trustee's Objection to the Debtor's Claim of Exempt Property entered by the bankruptcy court on November 29, 1994. In re Petit, 174 B.R. 868 (Bankr.D.Me.1994). The Debtor argues that the objection filed by Chapter 11 trustee Peter C. Fessenden ("Trustee Fessenden") was untimely under Rule 4003(b) of the Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure, and, therefore, [...]

    Court: District Court for the District of Maine Docket: Civ. No. 95-20-P-C
  14. Dyer v. Eastern Trust and Banking Company (1971)

    This action arises under the Securities Act of 1933 ("the Securities Act"), the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 ("the Exchange Act"), and the Maine Blue Sky Law. Plaintiff Edythe L. R. Dyer is a citizen of the State of Maine, formerly a stockholder of defendant Eastern Trust and Banking Company ("Eastern Trust"), and presently a stockholder of defendant Northeastern Bankshares Association ("the Association"). Eastern Trust is a Maine trust company. The Association is a Maine bank holding [...]

    Court: District Court for the District of Maine Docket: Civ. No. 1872
  15. Smith v. Robbins (1971)

    This is a class action under the Civil Rights Act, 42 U.S.C. § 1983, seeking injunctive relief against the censorship by the Maine State Prison authorities of so-called "legal mail," that is, inmate mail to and from courts and attorneys. Jurisdiction is conceded under 28 U.S.C. § 1343(3). The named plaintiff and the members of the plaintiff class are all confined in the prison serving sentences imposed by the courts of the State of Maine. Defendant is the warden of the prison, in whose [...]

    Court: District Court for the District of Maine Docket: Civ. No. 11-62
  16. United States v. Bowles (1958)

    On August 14, 1958 an indictment was returned in this Court charging George L. Bowles and Mayo S. Levenson with violations of the conspiracy, bribery and conflict of interest statutes of the United States. 18 U.S.C.A. §§ 371, 201, 202, and 281.


    Court: District Court for the District of Maine Docket: Crim. No. 58-38
  17. Gomes v. University of Maine System (2004)

    Frederick F. Costlow, Richardson, Whitman, Large & Badger, Bangor, ME, Harrison L. Richardson, Richardson, Whitman, Large & Badger, Portland, ME, Mary F. Kellogg, Richardson, Whitman, Large & Badger, Bangor, ME, for Paris Minor, Stefan Gomes, Plaintiffs.


    Court: District Court for the District of Maine Docket: CIV. 03-123-B-W
  18. Cardente v. Fleet Bank of Maine, Inc. (1992)

    This case involves the repudiation by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation ("FDIC")[1] as lessee of a lease with Douglas and Linda Cardente ("Plaintiffs"). As a result of this repudiation, Plaintiffs brought a Complaint filed January 21, 1992, seeking a declaratory judgment that its Note, Mortgage, and Agreement are unenforceable in light of Defendants' alleged breach of the lease. Defendants brought this motion to dismiss filed April 22, 1992, based on Plaintiffs' alleged failure to [...]

    Court: District Court for the District of Maine Docket: Civ. No. 92-30-P-C
  19. Nelson v. University of Maine System (1996)

    Plaintiffs Richard Nelson and Edwin Jessiman, professors at the University of Maine at Machias, sue the University of Maine System under Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 ("Title IX"), 20 U.S.C. §§ 1681-1688. Plaintiffs base their claims on the University's alleged retaliatory employment action. Nelson and Jessiman originally filed a five-count complaint against the University. In a prior order, however, the Court granted Defendant's Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings as to [...]

    Court: District Court for the District of Maine Docket: Civil No. 95-0179-B
  20. Shapiro v. Haenn (2002)

    Plaintiff claims that a bank and its attorney improperly filed a foreclosure action against him and pursued it after he had satisfied the underlying debt fully, in violation of state and federal consumer protection laws and state tort law. Four motions are presently before the Court: (1) Defendants Camden National Bank and Camden National Corporation's Motion for Summary Judgment (Docket # 33); (2) Defendant Haenn's Motion for Summary Judgment (Docket # 25); (3) Plaintiff's Motion to Strike [...]

    Court: District Court for the District of Maine Docket: 01-CV-101-B-S

1 of 126 Page(s)

Page:
  1. 2
  2. 3
  3. 4
  4. 5