Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Attorney(S)
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Attorney(S)

FRANK A. HOURIHAN, PETITIONER vs. GEORGE F. MAHONEY, INSURANCE COMMISSIONER

Mandamus

Mandamus is an extraordinary measure and a remedy to be employed only where there is no other legal resource and where the process will be effective.

MEMORANDUM DECISION

Appeal from dismissal of petition for writ of mandamus against the Insurance Commissioner certified to the Law Court under R.S., c. 129 § 17, et seq.

The single justice in substance concluded (1) that the petitioner asserted an alleged claim against the Life Insurance Company; (2) that R.S., c. 60 § 62, provided a right of action on such a claim; (3) that the Insurance Commissioner was under no duty to entertain or to hold a hearing upon the claim; and (4) that if the petition was to be considered not as a mandamus petition but as an appeal from a decision of the Insurance Commissioner, it was filed after the expiration of the thirty-day period. R.S., c. 60 § 350.

As the single justice said, in dismissing the petition, "Mandamus is an extraordinary measure and a remedy to be employed only where there is no other legal resource and where the process will be effective. Dorcourt Co. v. Great Northern Paper Co., 146 Me. 344; Steves v. Robie, 139 Me. 359."

The entry will be

Appeal denied.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

HOURIHAN, PET'R v. MAHONEY
(Sep 23, 1964)