Legal Opinion
In re Sen
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
Decided May 28, 1999PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtDana, J.
[¶ 1] Suzanne Sen and Arthur H. Has-sall appeal from a judgment entered in the Superior Court (Hancock County, Studstr-wp, J.) dismissing their petition to perpetuate testimony pursuant to M.R. Civ. P. 27 and denying their motion to amend the petition. Sen and Hassall argue that M.R. Civ. P. 27 permits discovery to determine if grounds exist to assert a claim for the wrongful interference with an expectancy and to contest a will, and that the court erred when it denied them leave to amend their petition. We disagree and affirm the judgment.
[¶ 2] In July 1998, Sen and Hassall, asserting that…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Harmon v. HarmonSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1979
- Potter, Prescott, Jamieson & Nelson, P.A. v. CampbellSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1998
- Kelly v. Michaud's Insurance Agency, Inc.Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1994
- Powers v. Planned Parenthood of Northern New EnglandSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1996
- Delta Kappa Epsilon Theta Chapter v. Theta Chapter House Corp.Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1995
3Cited by4 opinions
- Butler v. D/Wave SeafoodSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 2002
- Thibodeau v. ColeSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1999
- Sherbert v. RemmelSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 2006
- Thibodeau v. ColeSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1999