Maine Revised Statutes

Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 10, § 1213 (2026)

Remedies

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ME-LEGlegislature.maine.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

A person likely to be damaged by a deceptive trade practice of another may be granted an injunction against it under the principles of equity and on terms that the court considers reasonable. Proof of monetary damage, loss of profits or intent to deceive is not required. Relief granted for the copying of an article shall be limited to the prevention of confusion or misunderstanding as to source. [PL 1969, c. 503 (NEW).]

The court in exceptional cases may award reasonable attorney's fees to the prevailing party. Costs or attorney's fees may be assessed against a defendant only if the court finds that the defendant has willfully engaged in a deceptive trade practice. [RR 2023, c. 2, Pt. C, §25 (COR).]

The relief provided in this section is in addition to remedies otherwise available against the same conduct under the common law or other statutes of this State. [PL 1969, c. 503 (NEW).]

SECTION HISTORY

PL 1969, c. 503 (NEW). RR 2023, c. 2, Pt. C, §25 (COR).

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 8 cases, 1986–2017 · leading case: Sebago, Inc. v. Beazer East, Inc., 18 F. Supp. 2d 70 (D. Mass. 1998).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Sebago, Inc. v. Beazer East, Inc., 18 F. Supp. 2d 70 (D. Mass. 1998). · cites it 2× “” 10 M.R.S.A. § 1213 (emphasis added); see also Sebago Lake Camps, Inc.”

Advanced Constr. Corp. v. Pilecki, 2006 ME 84 (Me. 2006). “See 10 M.R.S. § 1213 (2005) (providing that the remedy available pursuant to the DTPA is an injunction); 10 M.”

J.S. McCarthy, Co. v. Brausse Diecutting & Converting Equip., Inc., 340 F. Supp. 2d 54 (D. Me. 2004). · cites it 3× “In its prayer for relief, McCarthy asks for “damages and attorneys fees as provided by 10 M.R.S.A. § 1213.” Brausse has moved to dismiss Count VI on the ground that Maine’s version of the Uniform Deceptive Trade Practices Act (UDTPA) allows for injunctive relief only and since…”

Doe v. Solvay Pharm., Inc., 350 F. Supp. 2d 257 (D. Me. 2004). “10 M.R.S.A. § 1213; see, e.g., L.L. Bean, Inc.”

DeSena v. Beekley Corp., 729 F. Supp. 2d 375 (D. Me. 2010). · cites it 3× “Maine Uniform Deceptive Trade Practices Act (“UDTPA”) (Seventh Counterclaim) Beekley’s Seventh Counterclaim alleges that Solstice has violated the Maine Deceptive Trade Practices Act by falsely advertising on its website that its mammography scar markers are covered by the '106…”

L.L. Bean, Inc. v. Drake Publishers, Inc., 629 F. Supp. 644 (D. Me. 1986). “Costs or attorneys’ fees may be assessed against a defendant only if the court finds that he has wilfully engaged in a deceptive trade practice. The relief provided in this section is in addition to remedies otherwise available .”

Mitchell v. Cent. Nat'l Gattesman, Inc. (Me. Super. Ct 2017). “10 M.R.S.A. § 1213. 14 ' • Defendants are therefore entitled to judgment as a matter of law on Count IX and their motion for summa1·y judgment is thus granted as to Count IX.”

The Knowles Co. v. N.E. Harbor Insurers (Me. Super. Ct 2003). “See 10 M.R.S.A. § 1213.) Because the plaintiff is not in the insurance business and because it would have taken time to develop that area of practice, one could not assume that the plaintiff suffered a dollar-for-dollar loss relative to the defendant’s gains.”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.