Title: Marek A. Kwasnik v. Peter E. Walsh et al.
Citation: 2004 ME 91
Docket Number: Cum-04-62
State: Maine
Issuer: Maine Supreme Court
Date: July 23, 2004

Marek A. Kwasnik v. Peter E. Walsh et al. Annotate this Case Download PDF MAINE SUPREME JUDICIAL COURT Decision: 2004 ME 91 Docket: Cum-04-62 Submitted On Briefs: July 9, 2004 Decided: July 23, 2004 Panel: Reporter of Decisions SAUFLEY, C.J., and, RUDMAN, DANA, ALEXANDER, CALKINS, and LEVY, JJ. MAREK A. KWASNIK v. PETER E. WALSH et al. PER CURIAM [¶1] Marek A. Kwasnik appeals from the denial by the Superior Court (Cumberland County, Crowley, J.) of his motion for leave to present additional evidence. Kwasnik filed a petition, pursuant to M.R. Civ. P. 80C, for review of a decision of the Department of Human Services, which upheld an administrative action to revoke his driver s license for nonpayment of a child support order. See 19-A M.R.S.A. §§ 2201 and 3102 (1998 and Supp. 2003). He timely filed a motion to present additional evidence, pursuant to M.R. Civ. P. 80C(e), and the Department filed an objection. Upon the court s denial of the motion, Kwasnik filed this appeal. 2 [¶2] There is no question that Kwasnik s appeal is interlocutory. There is no final judgment on his petition for review of governmental action. None of the exceptions to the final judgment rule that allow a party to appeal an interlocutory ruling apply to this situation. See Austin v. Universal Cheerleaders Ass n, 2002 ME 174, ¶¶ 4-9, 812 A.2d 253, 255-56. Because it is interlocutory, Kwasnik s appeal must be dismissed. The entry is: Appeal dismissed. ______________________ For plaintiff: Marek A. Kwasnik 99 Swett Road Windham, ME 04062 Attorneys for defendant: G. Steven Rowe, Attorney General Carlos Diaz, Asst. Attorney General 44 Oak Street, 4th floor Portland, ME 04101-3014 Attorney for defendant: