As recently noted on this blog, parties can appeal a preliminary injunction order in federal court under 28 U.S.C. § 1292 – but, typically, the same right of appeal is not available under Maine law. As stated in Sanborn v....more
Chief Justice Roberts recently issued his year-end report on the federal judiciary, appropriately focusing on the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic. The Chief Justice noted that 2020 ended with the judiciary in much the same...more
Interlocutory appeals, including those relating to injunctive relief, often present traps for the unwary. In state court in Maine, parties typically cannot appeal an order granting or denying a motion for preliminary...more
Late last week, the Law Court issued an important election law decision in Alliance for Retired Americans v. Secretary of State. In its opinion, the Court held that Maine’s deadline for receiving absentee ballots (8:00 p.m....more
Earlier this year, I asked a question on this blog: does the Maine Constitution, now in its 200th year, still matter? Shortly after, I offered a few reasons why it should still matter, including the Maine Constitution’s...more
I recently blogged about the need to file a cross-appeal of a favorable judgment in order to preserve an argument that provides alternate grounds for affirmance at the Law Court. As I noted, the Court has declined to reach...more
The Law Court this week issued an interesting decision in the ongoing ranked choice voting litigation that will have a broad application to appeals of final agency actions under M.R. Civ. P. 80C. The decision clarifies when...more
There is a new reality for appellate practitioners that is here to stay (for a while): oral arguments before the Law Court via Zoom. There are of course downsides to this new reality; I’m a firm believer that in-person...more
The Law Court recently addressed an issue of great importance to appellate practitioners: does a party need to cross-appeal a favorable judgment in order to preserve an argument providing alternate grounds for affirmance,...more
The Law Court recently issued a short decision, Wilmington Savings Fund Society, FSB v. Abildgaard, which provides a reminder of the importance of taking the appropriate steps at trial to ensure that interlocutory orders can...more
The coronavirus shut-down has been anything but a slow-down for this attorney-blogger, but it hasn’t entirely prevented me from continuing to muse about the Maine Constitution during its now-cancelled bicentennial...more
I recently wrote about the orders affecting appellate practice during the COVID-19 pandemic, noting the importance of staying up to date with current developments. While those developments continue at a relentless pace,...more
Holed up here in my home office like many of you, I thought it would be a helpful time to take stock of the current state of affairs in the courts of appeal during this pandemic. As with most of life, COVID-19 has disrupted...more
On March 15, 2020, Maine turns 200 years old. For any Mainer, especially history buffs, the bicentennial is an occasion worth celebrating. For any legal beagle, the bicentennial is worth celebrating for an additional reason:...more
Spreading the news that e-filing is coming might not have quite the same importance as the message delivered by Paul Revere and his fellow riders in 1775 – but e-filing is still worth noting. I attended the Maine State Bar...more
About a year ago, I observed that the First Circuit in In re Asacol Antitrust Litigation had constrained plaintiffs’ ability to rely on affidavits to prove injury-in-fact. In so doing, the First Circuit substantially...more
11/18/2019
/ Affidavits ,
Class Action ,
Class Certification ,
Class Members ,
Commonality ,
Due Process ,
FRCP 23 ,
Injury-in-Fact ,
Predominance Requirement ,
Seventh Amendment ,
Uninjured Class Members
Class arbitration came back before the Supreme Court this term in Lamps Plus, Inc. v. Varela. Today, the Supreme Court issued a 5-4 decision in Lamps Plus, holding that, under the Federal Arbitration Act, “courts may not...more
4/25/2019
/ Ambiguous ,
Appeals ,
Arbitration ,
Arbitration Agreements ,
Class Arbitration ,
Consent ,
Federal Arbitration Act ,
Federal v State Law Application ,
Jurisdiction ,
Lamps Plus Inc v Varela ,
Motion to Compel ,
Preemption ,
Reversal ,
SCOTUS
Yesterday, in a case that was being watched closely for its potential ramifications for class settlements, the Supreme Court opted not to address the merits of the cy pres issues that were presented to it....more
The Supreme Court meant what it said in China Agritech, Inc. v. Resh – that is the primary lesson from the First Circuit’s January 30th decision in In re Celexa and Lexapro Marketing and Sales Practices Litigation. ...more
When last I wrote about ascertainability, I noted that a debate over the propriety of “ascertainability-by-affidavit” continued to percolate within the First Circuit even as lower courts relied on In re Nexium Antitrust...more
This week, the First Circuit weighed in on a hot topic – the enforceability of arbitration provisions in online contracts. ...more
As various contributors to this blog have noted, a divided panel of the First Circuit adopted a “loose” approach to the ascertainability requirement in In re Nexium Antitrust Litigation. Specifically, while acknowledging...more
This week, Justice Gorsuch donned his black robes and began hearing arguments alongside his new colleagues on the Supreme Court. With his elevation to the high court, Justice Gorsuch assumes many new responsibilities. Some,...more
Class action practitioners have been closely watching Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins, a case before the Supreme Court on appeal from the Ninth Circuit. Spokeo presented the Court with the opportunity to decide whether a plaintiff...more
As we reported last year, in October 2015 the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau published an outline of proposals that would limit the use of arbitration provisions in contracts for consumer financial products. On May 5,...more
5/6/2016
/ Arbitration ,
Arbitration Agreements ,
AT&T Mobility v Concepcion ,
Class Action ,
Class Action Arbitration Waivers ,
Consumer Contracts ,
Consumer Financial Products ,
Financial Services Industry ,
SCOTUS ,
Service Contracts ,
Unconscionable Contracts