Oral arguments are at the Cumberland County Courthouse in Portland unless otherwise indicated. Additional dates may be scheduled to accommodate workload.
Caution: This schedule is subject to change. The case summaries are prepared by Court staff for the convenience of the public and are not to be construed as statements of the Court.
Oral Argument: Tuesday, October 6, 2026
at Katahdin High School, Stacyville
Ashley Lynne v. Department of Health and Human Services et al.
Carly R. Cosgrove; Sheldon J. Tepler; Brendan Kreckel; Clayton Adams; Alicia F. Curtis
Reimbursement for Medicaid expenses paid by State; interplay between "Medicaid recovery requirement" and "anti-lien provision"; portion of settlement funds received by Medicaid recipient that are subject to Medicaid reimbursement
Robbery; criminal threatening with a dangerous weapon; theft; jury instruction on missing witness; use of firearm as aggravating factor in sentencing for crime that has an element that the actor was "armed with a dangerous weapon"
Estate of Ramona Gowens et al. v. BPI Partners, LLC et al.
Christian J. Lewis; Charles P. Hehmeyer; Charles M. King; Nelson Larkins; Tiffany J. Ottenga
Topics and briefs will be posted soon.
10:00 a.m.
Han-25-509
State of Maine v. Anderson Harewood
Dawn Corbett; Daniel A. Wentworth
Topics and briefs will be posted soon
11:00 a.m.
Aro-26-13
State of Maine v. Scout D. Sylvester
Todd R. Collins; Matthew Hunter; Jeremy Pratt; Ellen Simmons
Topics and briefs will be posted soon
1:00 p.m.
Aro-26-29
State of Maine v. Lee McMoarn
Amanda L. Bridges; Rory A. McNamara; Dagan VanDenmark
Aggravated trafficking of scheduled drugs; search and seizure; search warrants; Franks hearings; probable cause for a second search; sentencing based on unsupported findings
Montagu Reid Hankin et al. v. Sarah B. Sewall et al.
Elizabeth A. Germani; Jeffrey T. Piampiano; Oliver Mac Walton; Joseph G. Talbot; Emily A. Arvizu; Shea H. Watson
Prescriptive easements; burden of proof; treatment of undeveloped lots; treatment of two lots with common ownership; "friendly neighbor" exception to presumption of adversity; easements by estoppel; easements by deed
The District Court terminated Danielle H.'s parental rights to her child. Danielle H. appeals, arguing that
there was insufficient evidence to support the court's finding of parental unfitness and that the court abused its discretion in determining that it was in the child's best interest to terminate her parental rights because the court did not adequately consider a permanency guardianship as an alternative to termination and because the guardian ad litem did not provide a reliable recommendation to the court.
3:10 p.m.
Som-22-182
State of Maine v. Nicholas W. Norris
Jason Horn; James M. Mason
Topics and summary to be announced
.
Oral Arguments: Afternoon of Wednesday, October 7, 2026 at the Cumberland County Courthouse, Portland
Jeremy W. Dean; Mark A. Kearns; Mark L. Randall; Cameron Goodwin; Lucus Ritchie; Sean Leonard; Scott Harris; John Stewart
Topics and briefs will be posted soon.
1:00 p.m.
Yor-26-136
In re Child of Kelly A.
Hunter C. Umphrey; Julian Richter; Deborah Feagans
Termination of parental rights; parental unfitness; best interest of child; refusal of parent to recognize risk caused by other parent
Because of the confidential nature of this matter, the briefs are not posted. See the summary of the appeal below.
The District Court denied the petition of the Department of Health and Human Services to terminate Kelly A.'s parental rights to her child. The Department appeals, arguing that the District Court erred in not finding that Kelly A. was unfit and that termination of her parental rights was in the child's best interest.
The Department argues that the court erred in not finding Kelly A. unfit
because (1) there was "overwhelming evidence" of her unfitness because she refused to believe that the father of her deceased infant had caused the infant's death, despite evidence that the infant had suffered blunt-force injuries while the parents were the infant's only caregivers, and instead blamed a medical condition; (2) the court's finding that Kelly A. has "performed all behavioral aspects" of the reuniciation plan was erroneous because the plan required the mother to "understand and articulate the inpact that [the father] has had on her children"; (3) the court erred in finding that Kelly A. did not know at the time of the infant's death that the father had caused the death.
The Department argues that the court erred in not finding that termination of Kelly A.'s rights was in the child's best interest because the guardian ad litem recommended termination; and the child had been placed for a long time with nurturing pre-adoptive parents who could, unlike Kelly A., be trusted to keep the child safe.
2:00 p.m.
Wal-25-290
In re Children of Natasha L.
Hunter C. Umphrey; Shea H. Watson; J.I. Aisha Simon
Termination of parental rights; "aggrieved party"; parental unfitness; best interest of child
Because of the confidential nature of this matter, the briefs are not posted. See the summary of the appeal below.
The District Court denied the petition of the Department of Health and Human Services to terminate the parental rights of Natasha L. to her children. The court found that Natasha L. was unfit but that it was not in the children's best interest to terminate her parental rights.
Natasha L. appeals, arguing that (1) she is an "aggrieved party" because the court, although it didn't terminate her parental rights, found her unfit, thereby depriving her of her right to direct the care, custody, and control of her children; (2) the court applied the wrong evidentiary standard
in finding that she was unfit; (3) the court abused its discretion by relying on outdated and unreliable evidence; and (4) the court made errors of fact.
The Department of Health and Human Services cross-appeals, arguing that (1) the court properly found by clear and convincing evidence that Natasha L. was unfit and (2) the court erred in failing to find that termination of Natasha L.'s parental rights was in the children's best interests.
1:30 p.m.
And-25-351
Zachary Wilson v. Elizabeth Gurney et al.
Carly R. Cosgrove; Sheldon J. Tepler; Thomas S. Marjerison
Topics & Briefs to be posted soon
The District Court granted summary judgment in favor of Francis and Maryann Janusz on their complaint for foreclosure against Eric Bacon. Bacon appeals, arguing that the trial court erred in determining that (1) the parties had completed mediation, which is a statutory prerequisite to a judgment of foreclosure; and (2) Bacon received proper notice of the motion for summary judgment even though the Januszes did not mail a copy of the motion to Bacon’s address of record.
3:10 p.m.
Lin-22-85
Michael Zani et al. v. Medora Zani et al.
Laura P. Shaw; Christopher K. MacLean; Marie Mueller; George T. Dilworth; Amy K. Olfene; Andre G. Duchette
In 2018, while she was the subject of a guardianship and conservatorship, Patricia Spofford executed a will that was admitted to probate upon her death. Spofford’s sons, Michael Zani and Peter Zani, filed suit in the Superior Court seeking a declaratory judgment that their mother lacked testamentary capacity when she executed the 2018 will and the imposition of a constructive trust on Spofford’s property, and alleging wrongful interference with an expectancy of inheritance against a beneficiary of the will and fraud against a witness to the will.
The Superior Court entered summary judgment against the Zanis on all counts. The Zanis appeal, arguing that the Superior Court erred in determining that there was no dispute of material fact regarding Spofford’s testamentary capacity on the date that she executed the 2018 will given that there was evidence of Spofford’s lack of testamentary capacity both before and after that date.
Oral Arguments: Morning of Thursday, October 8, 2026
at Kennebunk High School, Kennebunk
Timothy J. Bryant; Thomas C. LeBlond; George T. Dilworth; Susan M. Weidner
Topics and briefs will be posted soon.
2:30 p.m.
Yor-26-44
Community Loan Servicing LLC v. Estate of Norman Cloutier
Eva M. Massimino; John Z. Steed
Topics and briefs will be posted soon.
11:30 a.m.
Aro-21-312
Dennis F. Winchester v. State of Maine
Lawrence C. Winger; Todd R. Collins
The trial court denied Dennis Winchester’s petitions for post-conviction review of his convictions for various burglaries and thefts. On appeal, Winchester argues that his attorneys in the original criminal proceedings provided ineffective assistance of counsel by failing to pursue speedy-trial claims in the trial court and on appeal. This Court invited amicus briefs to address whether Winchester’s right to a speedy trial was violated under article 1, section 6 of the Maine Constitution or under the Sixth Amendment of the United States Constitution.
1:30 p.m.
Ken-22-53
State of Maine et al. v. Moosehead Mountain Resort et al.
Lauren E. Parker; Elliott R. Teel; Jonathan M. Flagg
The Superior Court granted summary judgment and awarded damages to the State of Maine in its suit against Moosehead Mountain Resort that sought to enforce covenants on a ski area once owned by the state and now owned by Moosehead, to ensure that the land remained available to the public. Moosehead appeals, arguing that the trial court erred in determining that (1) the deed to a predecessor-in-interest of Moosehead’s required that the land be maintained in a certain way; (2) a covenant can run with the land without a benefited parcel, (3) there were no genuine issues of material fact regarding whether a certain parcel retained by the State was a benefitted parcel or whether the defense of latches applied, (4) the ambiguities in the deed regarding the covenants must be resolved in favor of the state, (5) the covenant requiring that the land be available for “public use” is reasonable, and (6) the state was not required to give notice of its interpretation of the public-use covenant before suing Moosehead.
2:20 p.m.
Was-22-75
Francis Janusz et al. v. Eric Bacon et al.
William N. Palmer; Jonathan E. Selkowitz
The District Court granted summary judgment in favor of Francis and Maryann Janusz on their complaint for foreclosure against Eric Bacon. Bacon appeals, arguing that the trial court erred in determining that (1) the parties had completed mediation, which is a statutory prerequisite to a judgment of foreclosure; and (2) Bacon received proper notice of the motion for summary judgment even though the Januszes did not mail a copy of the motion to Bacon’s address of record.
3:10 p.m.
Lin-22-85
Michael Zani et al. v. Medora Zani et al.
Laura P. Shaw; Christopher K. MacLean; Marie Mueller; George T. Dilworth; Amy K. Olfene; Andre G. Duchette
In 2018, while she was the subject of a guardianship and conservatorship, Patricia Spofford executed a will that was admitted to probate upon her death. Spofford’s sons, Michael Zani and Peter Zani, filed suit in the Superior Court seeking a declaratory judgment that their mother lacked testamentary capacity when she executed the 2018 will and the imposition of a constructive trust on Spofford’s property, and alleging wrongful interference with an expectancy of inheritance against a beneficiary of the will and fraud against a witness to the will.
The Superior Court entered summary judgment against the Zanis on all counts. The Zanis appeal, arguing that the Superior Court erred in determining that there was no dispute of material fact regarding Spofford’s testamentary capacity on the date that she executed the 2018 will given that there was evidence of Spofford’s lack of testamentary capacity both before and after that date.
Aggravated trafficking of scheduled drugs; search and seizure; standing to challenge warrant authorizing tracking device on car that defendant was frequently a passenger in
After a bench trial, Zachary Borg was convicted of domestic violence aggravated assault (Class B), domestic violence reckless conduct (Class D), and endangering the welfare of a child (Class D). The victim was a child who ingested fentanyl that she found in the house after Borg and some guests of his used fentanyl in the house and one of the guests lost some of the fentanyl. Borg appeals, challenging the conviction for assault and arguing that (1) the court failed to make the necessary findings that the State had proved that Borg had the required mental state as to his conduct; (2) before a court may convict a person of assault, the State must prove that the person engaged in the “use” of “force” against the victim, and Borg did not use any force against the victim and (3) the conduct that the court found that Borg committed was not legally sufficient to cause the required resulting harm.
The Town of Eliot’s Zoning Board of Appeals reversed the decision of the town’s Planning Board approving Odiorne Lane Solar, LLC’s application to install ground-mounted solar arrays on land owned by the Estate of Lillian H. Cromwell. Odiorne sought review by the Superior Court, which reversed the decision of the Board of Appeals, thereby permitting the project to proceed.
Jay Meyer, whose property abuts the Estate’s land, appeals, arguing that (1) the Planning Board erred in determining that Odiorne’s application was for a “public utility facility,” which is permitted in any zone in the town; (2) the Superior Court erred in determining that he had waived any challenge to the project based on the town’s back-lot ordinance; and (3) the proposed solar array violates the back-lot ordinance because the land does not have access to a public road through an adequate right-of-way.
11:00 a.m.
Cum-24-82
Peter Masucci et al. v. Judy's Moody, LLC, et al.
Orlando E. Delogu; Lauren E. Parker; Scott W. Boak; Keith P. Richard; Benjamin Ford; Sandra Guay; Joseph G. Talbot; Emily A. Arvizu; Camerin M. Rivera; David P. Silk; Gordon R. Smith
Roger Ouellette entered a conditional guilty plea to OUI. Ouellette appeals from the denial of his motion to suppress, arguing that the trooper who charged him was not permitted to enter the curtilage of his home at night either to summons him for a traffic violation or for the purposes of an “OUI investigation” after seeing him drive partially in the lane for opposing traffic on a two-lane road, drive up a private road to a garage, and then, ten minutes later, cross the two-lane road, drive down another private road, and stop in front of a house.
1:30 p.m.
Ken-22-53
State of Maine et al. v. Moosehead Mountain Resort et al.
Lauren E. Parker; Elliott R. Teel; Jonathan M. Flagg
The Superior Court granted summary judgment and awarded damages to the State of Maine in its suit against Moosehead Mountain Resort that sought to enforce covenants on a ski area once owned by the state and now owned by Moosehead, to ensure that the land remained available to the public. Moosehead appeals, arguing that the trial court erred in determining that (1) the deed to a predecessor-in-interest of Moosehead’s required that the land be maintained in a certain way; (2) a covenant can run with the land without a benefited parcel, (3) there were no genuine issues of material fact regarding whether a certain parcel retained by the State was a benefitted parcel or whether the defense of latches applied, (4) the ambiguities in the deed regarding the covenants must be resolved in favor of the state, (5) the covenant requiring that the land be available for “public use” is reasonable, and (6) the state was not required to give notice of its interpretation of the public-use covenant before suing Moosehead.
2:20 p.m.
Was-22-75
Francis Janusz et al. v. Eric Bacon et al.
William N. Palmer; Jonathan E. Selkowitz
The District Court granted summary judgment in favor of Francis and Maryann Janusz on their complaint for foreclosure against Eric Bacon. Bacon appeals, arguing that the trial court erred in determining that (1) the parties had completed mediation, which is a statutory prerequisite to a judgment of foreclosure; and (2) Bacon received proper notice of the motion for summary judgment even though the Januszes did not mail a copy of the motion to Bacon’s address of record.
3:10 p.m.
Lin-22-85
Michael Zani et al. v. Medora Zani et al.
Laura P. Shaw; Christopher K. MacLean; Marie Mueller; George T. Dilworth; Amy K. Olfene; Andre G. Duchette
In 2018, while she was the subject of a guardianship and conservatorship, Patricia Spofford executed a will that was admitted to probate upon her death. Spofford’s sons, Michael Zani and Peter Zani, filed suit in the Superior Court seeking a declaratory judgment that their mother lacked testamentary capacity when she executed the 2018 will and the imposition of a constructive trust on Spofford’s property, and alleging wrongful interference with an expectancy of inheritance against a beneficiary of the will and fraud against a witness to the will.
The Superior Court entered summary judgment against the Zanis on all counts. The Zanis appeal, arguing that the Superior Court erred in determining that there was no dispute of material fact regarding Spofford’s testamentary capacity on the date that she executed the 2018 will given that there was evidence of Spofford’s lack of testamentary capacity both before and after that date.
Future Dates
Oral arguments
Consideration on briefs
Week of September 21, 2026
October 6, 2026, at Katahdin High School;
October 7, 2026, at Morse High School and Portland;
October 8, 2026, at Kennebunk High School and Portland
Week of October 19, 2026
November 3, 4, and 5, 2026, at Bangor
Week of November 16, 2026
[No oral arguments scheduled for December]
[No consideration on the briefs scheduled for December]