Legal Opinion · Dissent

Friedlander v. Hiram Ricker & Sons, Inc.

Supreme Judicial Court of Maine

Decided December 13, 1984Published

1Dissent

DUFRESNE, Active Retired Justice,

dissenting.

Robert and Ernest Friedlander, the plaintiff-trustees, pursuant to 14 M.R.S.A. §§ 5953 and 5955, the Uniform Declaratory Judgments Act of Maine, sought to obtain in Superior Court (Androscoggin County) a judgment declaring unenforceable a restrictive covenant contained in a deed from the corporate defendant, Hiram Ricker & Sons, Inc. (Ricker) to the plaintiffs’ predecessor in title. The Superior Court granted summary judgment against the moving plaintiffs in favor of both defendants, declaring the restrictive covenant valid and enforceable. On…

2Cases cited43 opinions

  1. Whitinsville Plaza, Inc. v. KotseasMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1979
  2. Portland Valve, Inc. v. Rockwood Systems Corp.Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1983
  3. Khaalis v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1979
  4. Beckwith v. RossiSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1961
  5. Hooker v. AlexanderSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1942

38 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