Eric Ring v. Daniel Leighton v. Clinton McGaw (Errata)
Annotate this CaseCourt Description: Errata. Go to corrected Opinion
Download PDF
MAINE SUPREME JUDICIAL COURT Reporter of Decisions Decision: 2019 ME 8 Docket: Pen-17-549 Argued: July 19, 2018 Decided: January 22, 2019 Revised: July 17, 2019 Panel: SAUFLEY, C.J., and ALEXANDER, MEAD, GORMAN, JABAR, HJELM, and HUMPHREY, JJ. Majority: SAUFLEY, C.J., and ALEXANDER, MEAD, GORMAN, JABAR, HJELM, and HUMPHREY, JJ. Concurrence: SAUFLEY, C.J., and ALEXANDER, J. ERIC RING v. DANIEL LEIGHTON v. CLINTON McGAW ERRATA SHEET The Court’s opinion certified on January 22, 2019, is revised as follows to insert an omitted open quotation mark in a citation in the last paragraph of footnote 10: See M.R.S.C.P. 11(a) (“an aggrieved party may appeal from a judgment of the District Court in a small claims action” (emphasis added)); M.R. Civ. P. 80L(e) (“[a] party entitled to appeal to the Law Court from a decision of the Superior Court may do so” (emphasis added)). The original opinion on the Judicial Branch website has been replaced with the opinion as revised.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
