Legal Opinion

Andrews v. Department of Environmental Protection

Supreme Judicial Court of Maine

Decided August 3, 1998PublishedCited by 20 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

RUDMAN, Justice.

[¶ 1] The Department of Environmental Protection and several of its employees in their personal capacities1 appeal from the denial in part by the Superior Court (Kenne-bec County, Alexander J.) of their motion for a summary judgment. The defendants contend that the court erred in determining that disputed issues of fact precluded the grant of a summary judgment. Andrews asserts that the defendants’ interlocutory appeal must be dismissed because it violates our final judgment rule. We deny the motion to dismiss and remand for the entry of a summary judgment in part.

[¶ 2] Jon…

2Cases cited33 opinions

  1. Harlow v. FitzgeraldSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
  2. Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of NarcoticsSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
  3. Will v. Michigan Department of State PoliceSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
  4. Kentucky v. GrahamSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
  5. Mitchell v. ForsythSupreme Court of the United States · 1985

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

3Cited by20 opinions

  1. Webb v. HaasSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1999
  2. Rodriguez v. Town of Moose RiverSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 2007
  3. Johnson v. CarletonSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 2001
  4. United States v. CarterSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 2002
  5. Millett v. Atlantic Richfield Co.Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · 2000

15 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