Legal Opinion

Rossignol v. Raynes

Supreme Judicial Court of Maine

Decided November 28, 1994PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

ROBERTS, Justice.

David and Lucienne Raynes appeal from an order entered in the Superior Court (Ken-nebec County, Chandler, J.) denying their motion to set aside a default judgment previously ordered by the court (Bradford, J.). Among other things, the Rayneses contend that a final judgment has not been properly entered. We agree. Ordinarily we dismiss an appeal when the judgment is not final pursuant to M.R.Civ.P. 54(b), or we remand for correction of the docket entry when a final judgment has not properly been entered. In this instance, however, the cumulative effect of errors in the record,…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Laurel Bank and Trust Co. v. BurnsSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1979
  2. York Mutual Insurance Co. of Maine v. MooersSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1980
  3. Town of Freeport v. Ocean Farms of Maine, Inc.Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1991
  4. Fleet Mortgage Corp. v. CobbSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1992

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Murphy v. MaddausSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 2002
  2. Samsara Memorial Trust v. Kelly, Remmel & Zimmerman Kelly, Remmel & Zimmerman v. Raisin Memorial TrustSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 2014
  3. 3 W PARTNERS v. BridgesSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1994
  4. Downeast Mortgage Corp. v. CutlerSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 2009
  5. Estate of LibbySupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 2018

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