Legal Opinion

Hall v. Town of Kittery

Supreme Judicial Court of Maine

Decided April 10, 1989PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

GLASSMAN, Justice.

Defendants Town of Kittery and Steven Furbish appeal from judgments of the Superior Court (York County) holding them responsible for personal injuries sustained by plaintiffs C. Leslie Hall and Marion B. Hall. Defendants argue on appeal that the Superior Court (Lipez, J.) ruled erroneously that plaintiffs had substantially complied with the 180-day notice requirement for the claim against a government entity or employee imposed by 14 M.R.S.A. § 8107 *663(1980 & Supp.1988). Because we find no such substantial compliance, we vacate the judgment.

I

The relevant facts may be briefly…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Darling v. Augusta Mental Health InstituteSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1987
  2. Faucher v. City of AuburnSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1983
  3. Erickson v. StateSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1982
  4. Robinson v. Washington CountySupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1987

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Pepperman v. BarrettSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1995
  2. Bruno v. City of LewistonSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1990
  3. Taylor v. Town of OronoSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1991
  4. Palm v. SISTERS OF CHARITY HEALTH, SYSTEMSDistrict Court, D. Maine · 2008
  5. Hall v. Town of KitterySupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1989

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API