Hale v. Antoniou
This text of 2003 ME 52 (Hale v. Antoniou) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Judicial Court of Maine primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Demetri Antoniou appeals from an order entered in the Superior Court (Cumberland County, Humphrey, J.) denying his motion to dismiss or, in the alternative, to stay judicial proceedings. The underlying action involves claims Michael and Edie Hale brought on behalf of their son, Jordan, against Antoniou for intentional infliction of emotional distress and civil assault. Antoniou asserts that the Superior Court erred in concluding that USA Hockey Inc.’s arbitration procedure did not govern the Hales’ claims. Because the Court is evenly divided, we affirm the judgment.
The entry is:
Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
2003 ME 52, 820 A.2d 586, 2003 Me. 52, 2003 Me. LEXIS 58, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hale-v-antoniou-me-2003.