Thursday, April 22, 2021
In a recent blog post, I explored the application of the final judgment rule to appeals from preliminary injunction orders in state court. As I noted, the Law Court has recently applied the “death knell” exception to that rule to hear an interlocutory appeal regarding a preliminary injunction. In two other recent cases, the Law Court has taken up and considered the “judicial economy” exception to the final judgment rule. These cases help delineate the scope of that exception.
The first case is
Cutting v. Down East Orthopedic Associates, P.A. In that case, a plaintiff brought separate cases in federal court asserting a discrimination claim and a medical malpractice claim against a physician. The district court granted summary judgment against the plaintiff in the discrimination case, and dismissed the second case for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. The plaintiff then filed a malpractice claim in state court, which the d
To embed, copy and paste the code into your website or blog:
In a recent blog post, I explored the application of the final judgment rule to appeals from preliminary injunction orders in state court. As I noted, the Law Court has recently applied the “death knell” exception to that rule to hear an interlocutory appeal regarding a preliminary injunction. In two other recent cases, the Law Court has taken up and considered the “judicial economy” exception to the final judgment rule. These cases help delineate the scope of that exception.
The first case is
Cutting v. Down East Orthopedic Associates, P.A. In that case, a plaintiff brought separate cases in federal court asserting a discrimination claim and a medical malpractice claim against a physician. The district court granted summary judgment against the plaintiff in the discrimination case, and dismissed the second case for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. The plaintiff then filed a malpractice claim in
Thursday, March 4, 2021
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. Sanborn, “an order granting or denying a motion for a preliminary injunction is not a final judgment and generally is not an action from which we will entertain an appeal.”
As the Law Court reaffirmed just a few weeks ago, in
[t]he final judgment rule is a judicially-created doctrine that promotes judicial economy and curtails interruption, delay, duplication and harassment.
To embed, copy and paste the code into your website or blog:
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. Sanborn, “an order granting or denying a motion for a preliminary injunction is not a final judgment and generally is not an action from which we will entertain an appeal.”
As the Law Court reaffirmed just a few weeks ago, in
[t]he final judgment rule is a judicially-created doctrine that promotes judicial economy and curtails interruption, delay, duplication and harassment.
Maine Court Says Tourette’s Patient Can Sue for Being Denied Procedure January 20, 2021
A woman who has Tourette’s syndrome may proceed with her lawsuit against a surgeon who declined to repair her injured shoulder because of her disability, the state Supreme Court ruled.
The doctor performed surgery on Carol Cutting’s injured shoulder but opted not to repair her torn rotator cuff because he thought her uncontrolled arm movements linked to her disability would cause the repair to fail.
The problem was that he never explained that to Cutting until after the surgery was over, preventing the patient from knowing all the options and risks, and having any say in them, said her attorney, Laura White.