Litigation / Dispute Resolution & Real Estate


Representative cases

  • Defeated major automobile manufacturer’s efforts to cap its damages owed to dealer for wrongful modification of dealer’s franchise agreement improper. Ford Motor Company v. Darling’s, 2016 ME 171, 151 A.3d 507.

  • Prevailed after five day trial in boundary dispute between oceanfront property owners. Whitehouse v. Watchowski, Lincoln County Superior Ct. RE-17-18 (Judgment dated 9/19/19), affirmed by Maine Law Court, MEM-20-45. Prevailed after five day trial, defeating efforts of property owners to eliminate rights of access to beach area. Decision affirming deeded rights affirmed. Gravison v. Fisher, 2016 ME 35.

  • Prevailed after three day trial, defeating effort by property owners to eliminate deeded beach access belonging to clients. Decision in favor of clients affirmed by Maine Law Court. Edwards v. Blackman, 2015 ME 165.

  • Successfully defended jury verdict in favor of Maine Ford dealer before the Law Court. Law Court also affirmed decisions upholding the constitutionality of the Maine Dealer Act, notice provisions required under that Act, and the methodology of appealing decisions of the Maine Motor Vehicle Franchise Board. Ford Motor Company v. Darling’s, 2014 ME 7.

  • Represented property owners in appeal of issuance of a permit to install a seasonal stairway for shore access over clients’ land which was burdened by an easement for the benefit of others in the same subdivision. The Law Court agreed with Judy’s clients that the Board of Appeals had failed to make a finding required by ordinance and remanded the case. D’Alessandro v. Town of Harpswell, 2012 ME 89.

  • Assisted clients in a variety of matters to resolve long lingering title defects where lost deeds, unclaimed interests, and ancient claims affect the marketability of property. For example, Watchowski v. Heirs of Harlow, Lincoln Cty Super. Ct., RE-2010-47; Egers v. Mifflin, Cumberland Cty. Super. Ct., RE-07-251; Matheson v. Wickes, Lincoln Cty Super. Ct., RE-05-11; Stebbins v. Heirs of Waterhouse, WES-RE-99-04.

  • Assisted clients in resolving through negotiated settlements a variety of real estate disputes that impaired the marketability of property and/or interfered with the quiet enjoyment of land: Dee v. O’Shea, Cumberland Cty. Super. RE-10-136 (boundary and prescriptive beach easement); Center v. Halliday, Cumberland Cty. Super. RE-10-317 (easement dispute); Nelson v. Peterson, Knox Cty. Super. RE-09-09 (boundary dispute); Giorno v. Oliver, Sagadahoc Cty. Super. RE-09-19 (boundary dispute; validity of deed); Hartman v. Maffei, Cumberland Cty. Super. RE-09-52 (adverse possession; boundary by acquiescence); Town of Litchfield v. Richard, Kenn. Cty. Super. RE-12-01 (dispute re: boundary abutting public easement and easement rights along way).

  • Represented owners of land burdened by easement in action to enforce a settlement agreement with a homeowner’s association and other owners in the neighborhood who had the right to use the easement. The Superior Court granted summary judgment to clients. On appeal by the association, the Law Court affirmed the decision in favor of Judy’s clients that the association was bound by its settlement agreement. Muther v. Broad Cove Shore Association, 968 A.2d 539, 2009 ME 37.

  • Represented owners of land claimed by abutters under the Maine paper streets statute.

  • Successfully proved by summary judgment that statutes pertaining to paper streets cannot serve to strip clients of title to land where it is clear that chain of title and deeds in place prior to effective date of paper street statute transferred the title to Judy’s clients. Parsons v. Guttenplan, Lincoln Cty. Super. Ct. RE-09-39.

  • Represented owners of land depicted as numbered lots on a recorded plan where their right to travel on the paper streets depicted on the plan was blocked.

  • Successfully proved on summary judgment that under the paper streets statute, clients’ right to travel on proposed ways could not be extinguished merely because the town did not accept the proposed ways as public streets. Gabriele v.Mahan, Knox Cty. Super. Ct. RE-04-03.

  • Represented Village in action for declaratory judgment brought by property owners concerning the constitutionality of a village tax. The Superior Court entered judgment for Village. Village successfully defended that decision to the Maine Law Court, which affirmed that the tax was constitutional. Rackliffe v. Northport Village Corp., 711 A.2d 1282, 1998 ME 114.

  • Prevailed at trial concerning location of boundary. Trial court decision upheld on appeal. Perkins v. Graves, 642 A.2d 1349 (Me. 1994).