Legal Opinion · Dissent

Burns v. Smith

Supreme Judicial Court of Maine

Decided July 11, 1985Published

1DissentScolnik, Justice

I respectfully dissent. It is, of course, true that this Court gives great deference to the substantive decision of the Superior Court as to whether the plaintiff has shown “that there is a reasonable likelihood that the plaintiff will recover judgment ... in an amount equal to or greater than the amount of the attachment_” M.R. Civ.P. 4A; see DiPietro v. Casco Northern Bank, 490 A.2d 215, 218 (Me.1985); Herrick v. Theberge, 474 A.2d 870, 874 (Me.1984). But the occasion for that deference exists only where the Superior Court properly exercised its discretion.

Rule 4A(h) states that,…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Fuentes v. ShevinSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
  2. Bowman v. DussaultSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1981
  3. Herrick v. ThebergeSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1984
  4. Corbett v. CurtisSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1967
  5. DiPietro v. Casco Northern BankSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1985

3 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