Budge v. Town of Millinocket
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
1DissentJabar, J.
[¶ 30] I respectfully dissent.
[¶ 31] Although I agree with the Court’s conclusion that the language in this case does not rise to the level of an express contract as mandated in Spiller v. State, 627 A.2d 513, 515-17 (Me.1993), I do not agree that the employees failed to create a genuine issue of material fact regarding promissory estoppel. In Spiller, the leading case involving legislation concerning retirement benefits for public employees, the Court left open the possibility that public employees could prove their claim to promised benefits through the concept of promissory estoppel. Id.…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Christensen v. Minneapolis Municipal Employees Retirement BoardSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1983
- Spiller v. StateSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1993
- Sirois v. Town of FrenchvilleSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1982
- School Administrative District 3 v. Maine School District CommissionSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1962
- Mason v. City of AugustaSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 2007
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.