Legal Opinion

Lane v. Maine Central Railroad

Supreme Judicial Court of Maine

Decided April 17, 1990PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

ROBERTS, Justice.

Once again we address the propriety of the summary disposition of civil litigation on a “motion to confirm settlement.” The Superior Court, (Kennebec County, Brody, C.J.) granted the motion of defendant Maine Central Railroad on the grounds that settlement was agreed upon between counsel and that it is important that one lawyer be able to accept another lawyer’s representation. Although such considerations might support the imposition of sanctions, we conclude that they are insufficient to justify the use of a summary procedure to discharge plaintiff Joseph G. Lane’s claim…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Pomeroy v. PrescottSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1910
  2. Perkins v. PhilbrickSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1982
  3. Phillips v. FullerSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1988
  4. Phillips v. FullerSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1987

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Page v. PageSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1996
  2. Estate of Harold Forest SnowSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 2014
  3. Mitchell v. KrieckhausSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 2017
  4. Northern Maine Transport LLC v. Onebeacon America InsuranceDistrict Court, D. Maine · 2011
  5. Transamerica Commercial Finance Corp. v. BirtSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1991

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API