Source: http://me.findacase.com/research/wfrmDocViewer.aspx/xq/fac.20170807_0000376.ME.htm/qx
Timestamp: 2019-04-24 09:15:18+00:00

Document:
Plaintiffs appeal from a decision by Defendant's, Council of the Town of Brunswick's ("Council's") decision not to hold a public hearing on a proposed ordinance, pursuant to Maine Rule of Civil Procedure 80B. Plaintiffs have also brought a declaratory judgment claim for which they seek summary judgment.
Based on the following, the appeal is denied as moot. The court grants in part and denies in part summary judgment on the claim for declaratory relief.
On February 21, 2017, Plaintiffs filed a complaint containing two counts: (I) an 80B appeal of the Council's decision not to schedule a public hearing about the signed petitions; and (II) seeking a declaratory judgment of: (a) what is encompassed by the term "Police Power" in § 1105; and (b) whether an ordinance potentially having an effect contrary to a Council order can be initiated pursuant to § 1105. On March 8, 2017, Defendant answered. On April 6, 2017, the parties filed an agreed-to statement of fact. On April 7, 2017, the court ordered that Count II is subsumed by the Count I, 80B appeal, and to be addressed through the summary judgment process, where the 80B record would be treated as the summary judgment record and Plaintiffs' 80B brief would be treated as a motion for summary judgment in relation to Count II.
On June 15, 2017, the property was sold.
The 80B appeal seeking an order for the Council to schedule a public hearing on the signed petitions was rendered moot by the sale of the property.
Summary judgment is appropriate, if based on the parties' statement of material facts and the cited record, no genuine issue of material fact exists and the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Bed v. Allstate Ins. Co., 2010 ME 20, ¶ 11, 989 A.2d 733; Dyer v. Dep't of Transport, 2008 ME 106, ¶ 14, 951 A.2d 821. "[A] fact is material if it could potentially affect the outcome of the case." Reliance Nat'l Indem. v. Knowles Indus. Servs., 2005 ME 29, ¶ 7, 868 A.2d 220. A genuine issue of material fact exists where the fact finder must choose between competing versions of the truth. Id. (citing Univ. of Me. Found, v. Fleet Bank of Me., 2003 ME 20, ¶ 20, 817 A.2d 871). When deciding a motion for summary judgment, the court reviews the materials in the light most favorable to the non-moving party. Dyer, 2008 ME 106, ¶ 14, 951 A.2d 821.
The party opposing a summary judgment must point to specific facts showing that a factual dispute does exist in order to avoid a summary judgment. Watt v. Unifirst Corp., 2009 ME 47, ¶ 21, 969 A.2d 897; Reliance Nat'l Indent., 2005 ME 29, ¶ 9, 868 A.2d 220. Summary judgment, when appropriate, may be rendered against the moving party. M.R. Civ. P. 56(c).

References: § 1105
 § 1105
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.