Opinion ID: 1537255
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: The Portland Company's Coercion Claim

Text: [¶ 31] The Portland Company argues that the court erred in determining that the Portland Company, through its stipulation with the City, waived its claim that the City engaged in illegal coercion, in violation of 23 M.R.S. § 154-B, as to parcels A-1 and A-2. The Portland Company argues that the stipulation explicitly preserves the company's right to challenge the legality of the taking, and that it may do so pursuant to section 154-B. We review the interpretation of a contract de novo. Cheung v. Wu, 2007 ME 22, ¶ 24, 919 A.2d 619, 624. By entering into the stipulation, the Portland Company agreed to relinquish all rights to damages or other payment or relief. The Portland Company therefore unambiguously waived its right to seek any relief pursuant to section 154-B with respect to parcels A-1 and A-2.