Legal Opinion

Alexander v. Mitchell

Supreme Judicial Court of Maine

Decided August 14, 2007PublishedCited by 14 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtSaufley, C.J.

[¶ 1] The question before us is this: Does a person or company that has contracted with a municipality to plow, salt, and sand the town’s roads owe a general duty of care to all members of the public using those roads based on the terms of the contract? In the circumstances of the matter before us, we conclude that no such duty is owed.

[¶ 2] Steven Alexander appeals from the Superior Court’s grant of a summary judgment (Penobscot County, Mead, J.) in favor of the plowing contractor, Philip Mitchell. Alexander contends that the court erred in determining that Mitchell did not owe a duty of…

2Cases cited24 opinions

  1. Curtis v. PorterSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 2001
  2. Cameron v. PepinSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1992
  3. Wells v. Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co.Appellate Court of Illinois · 1988
  4. Trusiani v. Cumberland & York Distributors, Inc.Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1988
  5. Searles v. Trustees of St. Joseph's CollegeSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1997

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

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. Anderson v. Hannaford Bros. Co.Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 2011
  2. Lougee Conservancy v. Citimortgage, Inc.Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · 2012
  3. Gniadek v. Camp Sunshine at Sebago Lake, Inc.Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · 2011
  4. Davis v. R C & Sons Paving, Inc.Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · 2011
  5. State of Maine v. Dan BrownSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 2014

9 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