Court Opinion

ID: 9508405
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-06 21:31:35.413434+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:07:32.114800
License: Public Domain

MR. JUSTICE WEBER
specially concurring:
I agree with the conclusion of the majority opinion that the issue of accord and satisfaction is determinative in this case. I further agree with the determination of the majority opinion that the claim was a disputed and unliquidated claim and that acceptance by the department of the check created an accord and satisfaction. In addition I concur with the affirmation by the majority of the attorney’s fee determination by the District Court. As a result, I concur in the majority opinion.
I do not join in the majority conclusion that the motion to set aside enforcement was an independent action and not subject to the limitations of Rule 60(c) M.R.Civ.P. In particular, I do not agree with the majority conclusion that the absence of personal service of the amended warrants of distraint constituted a violation of the defendant’s rights to due process.
MR. JUSTICE GULBRANDSON concurs in the foregoing special concurrence.