Legal Opinion
City of Portland v. Fisherman's Wharf Associates II
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
Decided April 27, 1988PublishedCited by 15 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
SCOLNIK, Justice.
The City of Portland, the Attorney General and the Working Waterfront Coalition appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court (Cumberland County), declaring that an initiated ordinance cannot be retroactively applied to a development application that the defendant, Fisherman’s Wharf Associates II, filed while the initiated ordinance was pending. The defendant cross-appeals that portion of the judgment that dismissed a number of its counterclaims as moot. We vacate the judgment.
I
On December 22, 1986, the text of a proposed amendment to the City of Portland’s zoning ordinance…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Coates v. Maine Employment Security CommissionSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1979
- Thomas v. Zoning Board of Appeals of the City of BangorSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1978
- Bank of Maine, N.A. v. WeisbergerSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1984
- Poire v. ManchesterSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1986
3Cited by15 opinions
- Riley v. Bath Iron Works Corp.Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1994
- Kittery Retail Ventures, LLC v. Town of KitterySupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 2004
- Tompkins v. Wade & Searway Construction Corp.Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1992
- Demello v. Department of Environmental ProtectionSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1992
- Schlear v. Fiber Materials, Inc.Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1990
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.