Skip to main content
DRAFT FOR ATTORNEY REVIEW — NOT FINAL

Union River Associates v. Budman, 2004 ME 48 (2004)

Citation
Union River Associates v. Budman, 2004 ME 48 (2004)
Parent Document
Union River Associates v. Budman, 2004 ME 48 (2004)
Jurisdiction
Maine (state)
Effective Date
2004-04-08

Other Sections in This Document (49)

Full Text

725 chars
[¶ 6] Budman also claimed that prior to the hearing Union River agreed to dismiss the complaint if he paid his rent arrearag-es and that he then paid the arrearages to Union River, but that Union River had failed to dismiss the complaint. He sought to introduce the testimony of his former attorney concerning the attorney’s negotiation of a settlement with Union River’s attorney. Union River objected to Bud-man’s former attorney’s testimony on the ground that its admission would violate M.R. Evid. 408(a) governing the admission of evidence of offers of compromise. The court sustained the objection and excluded the testimony, ruling that the evidence of settlement negotiations was inadmissible pursuant to Rule 408(a).