Skip to main content
INTERNAL PROTOTYPE — NOT LEGAL ADVICE — DO NOT SEND

Monopoly, Inc. v. Aldrich, 683 A.2d 506 (1996)

Citation
Monopoly, Inc. v. Aldrich, 683 A.2d 506 (1996)
Parent Document
Monopoly, Inc. v. Aldrich, 683 A.2d 506 (1996)
Jurisdiction
Maine (state)
Effective Date
1996-10-15

Other Sections in This Document (46)

Full Text

601 chars
The trial court denied the Aldriches any further attorney fees beyond those awarded in the partial summary judgment on the ground that “the defendants have not prevailed in their additional claim for double damages.” The lease contract itself does not define “prevailing party.” This Court, however, in the similar context of awarding trial costs pursuant to the rules of civil procedure, has interpreted the term “prevailing party” as unambiguous and meaning a party prevailing with reference to the suit as a whole. As we stated in Inhabitants of Sabattus v. Bilodeau, Me., 395 A.2d 123, 124 (1978):