Cases

MAINE SUPREME JUDICIAL COURT Reporter of Decisions Decision: 2026 ME 94 Docket: Cum-25-29 Argued: November 13, 2025 Decided: September 1, 2026 Panel: STANFILL, C.J., and MEAD, CONNORS, LAWRENCE, DOUGLAS, and LIPEZ, JJ. EMILY A. BICKFORD v. MATTHEW A. BRADEEN STANFILL, C.J. [¶1] Emily A. Bickford appeals from an ord

Nichols, Judge: The merchandise involved in these cases, consolidated at the trial, consists of knives or blades for machines known as punches, shears, or bar cutters, intended for use in fabricating structural or other rolled iron or steel shapes, imported from West *94Germany at various dates in the years 1957 through 1961. They were assessed with duty at 30 per centum ad

430 N.W.2d 87 (1988) Nancy E. BRADEEN, Plaintiff and Appellee, v. James B. BRADEEN, Defendant and Appellant. No. 15892. Supreme Court of South Dakota. Argued March 24, 1988. Decided October 5, 1988. Rehearing Denied November 1, 1988. James L. Waggoner, Rapid City, for plaintiff and appellee. Hermon B. Walker, Rushmore Legal C

650 F.Supp. 600 (1986) David L. SIDDOCK and Charlotte Siddock, Plaintiffs, v. UPTON, BRADEEN & JAMES, LTD., a foreign corporation, Defendant. Civ. A. No. 85-72862. United States District Court, E.D. Michigan, S.D. December 18, 1986. John R. Weber, Weber, Swanson & Wieter, Marquette, Mich., for plaintiffs. Stan C. Kazul, Louann Van Der Wiele, Kazul, Ho

TORRUELLA, Circuit Judge. Following a bench trial in the U.S. District Court for the District of Maine, Defendant-Appellant James M. Cameron (“Cameron”) was convicted of thirteen counts for crimes involving child pornography. Cameron now appeals, challenging various rulings by the district court before and after the trial. The challenged rulings include: (1) the denial of a motion to dismiss the indictment for insufficiency an

762 F.Supp.2d 203 (2011) UNITED STATES of America, v. Matthew G. CLARK, Defendant. No. 2:10-cr-62-GZS. United States District Court, D. Maine. January 27, 2011. *204 Theodore Griswold Fletcher, Law Office of Theodore G. Fletcher, Southwest Harbor, ME, for Defendant. Craig M. Wolff, U.S. Attorney's Office, Richard W. Murphy

729 F.Supp.2d 411 (2010) UNITED STATES of America v. James M. CAMERON. No. CR-09-24-B-W. United States District Court, D. Maine. August 3, 2010. *412 Gail Fisk Malone, Office of the U.S. Attorney, District of Maine, Bangor, ME, Donald E. Clark, U.S. Attorney's Office, Portland, ME, for United States of America. Peter E. Ro

672 F.Supp.2d 133 (2009) United States of America v. James CAMERON. No. CR-09-24-B-W. United States District Court, D. Maine. October 7, 2009. Order Amending Order on Motions for Discovery November 30, 2009. *135 Gail Fisk Malone, Office of the U.S. Attorney, Bangor, ME, for United States of America. Peter

658 F.Supp.2d 241 (2009) UNITED STATES of America v. James CAMERON. No. CR-09-24-B-W. United States District Court, D. Maine. September 28, 2009. *243 Peter E. Rodway, Rodway & Horodyski, Portland, ME, for James Cameron. Gail Fisk Malone, Office of the U.S. Attorney, District of Maine, Bangor, ME, Donald E. Clark, U.S.

666 F.Supp.2d 148 (2009) UNITED STATES of America v. Brian K. ROGERS, Defendant. No. 08-cr-193-P-S. United States District Court, D. Maine. October 7, 2009. Craig M. Wolff, U.S. Attorney's Office District of Maine, Portland, ME, for United States of America. Sarah A. Churchill, Strike, Goodwin & O'Brien, Portland, ME, for Brian K. Rogers.

BOUDIN, Chief Judge. On August 25, 1998 Lisa Bunnell, the defendant’s ex-wife, applied for a state court order of'protection against the defendant Steven Bunnell. The"final two-year order, issued'on September 11, 1998, and served on Bunnell, prohibited' the use, attempted use, or threatened use of physical force against Lisa Bunnell. The order (issued after notice and an opportunity

106 F.Supp.2d 60 (2000) UNITED STATES of America v. Steven BUNNELL, Defendant. No. 00-36-P-C. United States District Court, D. Maine. July 11, 2000. *61 Henry W. Griffin, Lewiston, ME, for Steven Bunnell, Defendant. Helene Kazanjian, Office of U.S. Attorney, Portland, ME, for U.S.

USCA1 Opinion UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT ____________________ No. 96-1148 UNITED STATES, Appellee, v.

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT No. 96-1148 UNITED STATES, Appellee, v. DAVID P. BIZIER, Defendant - Appellant. APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

WOODLOCK, District Judge. The sole issue in this appeal from a criminal judgment for possession with intent to distribute cocaine is whether a motion to suppress the subject cocaine should have been granted when the contraband was seized in a warrantless body search conducted immediately before the defendant’s formal arrest. We find there was probable cause, independent of the c

193 F.3d 165 (3rd Cir. 1999) SPRING CITY CORPORATION, trading as SPRING II ASSOCIATES,v.AMERICAN BUILDINGS COMPANY,v.CONTRACTORS OF AMERICA, INC.v.PALMER CONSTRUCTION CO., INC.; BASILE CONSTRUCTION COMPANY American Buildings Company, AppellantSPRING CITY CORPORATION, trading as SPRING II ASSOCIATES,v.LYNN BRADEEN; CONTRACTORS OF AMERICA, INC.; AMERICAN BUILDINGS COMPANY American Buildings Company, Appellant

FoRD, Judge: The subjeot importations, described as a turret punch press and parts, were classified as “Punches * * * intended for use in fabricating structural or other rolled iron or steel shapes” under paragraph 372 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as modified by the Sixth Protocol of Supplementary Concessions to the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, T.D. 54108, and were assessed with duty at the rate of 17 per centum ad valo

United States Court of Appeals For the First Circuit No. 20-2030 MARÍA DOLORES MALDONADO-CABRERA ET AL., Plaintiffs, Appellants, v. DR. JORGE ANGLERO-ALFARO ET AL., Defendants, Appellees. APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF PUERTO RICO [Hon. Raúl M. Arias-Marxuach, U.S. District Judge]

STATEMENT ARTHUR M. GREENWALD, Bankruptcy Judge. The debtor/plaintiffs have filed a complaint objecting to claims filed by the named defendants against the debt- or/plaintiff s’ estates, asserting twenty-one claims for relief. Each claim for relief identifies the suing debtor/plaintiff and the defendant against whom relief is sought. The debtor/plaintiffs request the disallowance of th

JEFFREY L. VIKEN, CHIEF JUDGE INTRODUCTION Plaintiffs Holli Telford and Marty Noble, appearing pro se , filed this action against the defendants. (Docket 8). The verified amended complaint includes wide-ranging allegations, and plaintiffs contend a variety of federal and state laws support their case. Id. All defendants filed motions to dismiss. Defendant Jared Eldridge ("Judge El