Thanks for visiting! Welcome to a new way to research case law. You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation and good law / bad law checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.
Midland Fiberglass, Inc. v. L.M. Smith Corp.
Citations: 581 A.2d 402; 1990 Me. LEXIS 256
Court: Supreme Judicial Court of Maine; October 16, 1990; Maine; State Supreme Court
In Midland Fiberglass, Inc. v. L.M. Smith Corp., the Supreme Judicial Court of Maine affirmed a Superior Court judgment favoring the defendants, L.M. Smith Corp. and Larry Smith, following a jury verdict. The case originated from a complaint by plaintiffs Bruce H. Pooler and Midland, alleging fraudulent control over Midland by the defendants. The defendants counterclaimed for breach of contract and warranty. Key issues included the plaintiffs' unsuccessful attempts to amend their complaint to add claims of wrongful interference with business relationships, breach of duty of good faith, and punitive damages. During trial, a motion to amend the complaint based on issues tried by consent was also denied. The jury ultimately ruled in favor of the defendants. On appeal, the plaintiffs argued that the admission of a telephone deposition was erroneous due to notice defects. However, the court found that even if errors existed, they did not substantially affect the plaintiffs' rights since the deposition supported existing testimony rather than introducing new impeaching evidence, thus qualifying as harmless error. Additionally, the plaintiffs contended that the court erred in not instructing the jury on the unpleaded issues, citing M.R.Civ.P. 15(b). The court reiterated that issues not raised in the pleadings must be explicitly consented to by both parties to be treated as if they were included. The defendants did not consent to the additional issues, and the court's denial of the plaintiffs' motions to amend indicated a failure to demonstrate that those issues were tried by consent. The judgment was ultimately affirmed, with all justices concurring.