Case Citation
Legal Case Name

DYER v. MAINE DRILLING & BLASTING, INC. Case Brief

Supreme Judicial Court of Maine2009
984 A.2d 210 2009 ME 126

Why Top Law Students (And Those Aspiring to Be) Use LSD+ Briefs

Let's be real, law school is a marathon. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full case system is designed by Harvard Law School and MIT grads to match your pace: Quick summaries when you're slammed, detailed analysis when you need to go deep. Only LSD+ offers this kind of flexibility to genuinely fit your study flow.

Adaptive Case Views

Toggle between Flash, Standard, and Expanded. Get what you need, when you need it.

Exam-Ready IRAC Format

We deliver the precise structure professors look for in exam answers.

Complex Cases, Clarified

We break down dense legal reasoning into something digestible, helping you grasp core concepts.

Case Brief Summary & Legal Analysis

General Brief
4 min read

tl;dr: Homeowners sued a blasting company for property damage. The court abandoned its old negligence-only rule for blasting cases, adopting a strict liability standard for abnormally dangerous activities and finding the homeowners had presented enough evidence of causation to proceed to trial.

Legal Significance: This case overruled 50 years of precedent by adopting the Restatement (Second) of Torts’ framework for strict liability for abnormally dangerous activities, making Maine a strict liability jurisdiction for harms caused by activities like blasting, regardless of the defendant’s exercise of care.

DYER v. MAINE DRILLING & BLASTING, INC. Law School Study Guide

Use this case brief structure for your own legal analysis. Focus on the IRAC methodology to excel in law school exams and cold calls.

Case Facts & Court Holding

Key Facts & Case Background

The Dyer family owned a home for over fifty years. In 2004, Maine Drilling & Blasting, Inc. began conducting over 100 explosive blasts near the home for a bridge construction project. The Dyers documented the home’s condition with a pre-blast survey and videotape. After blasting commenced, the Dyers observed significant new damage, including a sagging basement floor, new and enlarged cracks in the foundation, and a shifted retaining wall. The defendant’s own seismograph data revealed that six blasts produced vibrations exceeding the ‘safe operating envelope’ established by the U.S. Bureau of Mines. The Dyers’ expert testified that blasting could cause the observed damage, particularly if the house rested on ‘uncontrolled fill,’ and that such damage was unlikely to be the result of normal settling, which occurs over a much longer period. The trial court granted summary judgment for Maine Drilling, holding that existing Maine law required proof of negligence, which it found the Dyers had failed to establish, specifically on the element of causation.

Court Holding & Legal Precedent

Issue: Should a party that conducts blasting operations be subject to strict liability for resulting property damage, thereby overruling prior precedent that required a plaintiff to prove negligence?

Yes. The court adopted the Restatement (Second) of Torts’ rule of strict Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proiden

Master Every Case Faster

Unlock premium legal analysis that helps you quickly understand complex cases, designed by Harvard Law and MIT graduates. It's about working smarter, not just harder.

Start 14-Day Free Trial

Thousands of students are already saving time and gaining clarity. Why not you?

IRAC Legal Analysis

Premium Feature Unlock

Complete IRAC Analysis for Higher Grades

IRAC (Issue, Rule, Analysis, Conclusion) is the exact format professors want to see in your exam answers. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full briefs combine holding, analysis, and rule statements formatted to match what A+ students produce in exams. These structured briefs help reinforce the essential legal reasoning patterns expected in law school.

Legal Issue

Should a party that conducts blasting operations be subject to strict liability for resulting property damage, thereby overruling prior precedent that required a plaintiff to prove negligence?

Conclusion

This decision fundamentally changed Maine tort law by aligning it with the Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamc

Legal Rule

A person who engages in an abnormally dangerous activity is subject to Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteu

Legal Analysis

The Supreme Judicial Court of Maine overruled its 1950 precedent in *Reynolds Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad min

Flash-to-Full Case Opinions

Flash Summary

  • Maine adopts strict liability for abnormally dangerous activities, overruling prior precedent
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteu

Master Every Case Faster

Unlock premium legal analysis that helps you quickly understand complex cases, designed by Harvard Law and MIT graduates. It's about working smarter, not just harder.

Start 14-Day Free Trial

Thousands of students are already saving time and gaining clarity. Why not you?

It is better to risk saving a guilty man than to condemn an innocent one.

✨ Enjoy an ad-free experience with LSD+