Me. Rev. Stat. » Title 11
Maine Revised Statutes

Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 11, § 1-201 (2026)

General definitions

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ME-LEGlegislature.maine.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
(REPEALED)
SECTION HISTORY
PL 1965, c. 306, §4 (AMD). PL 1977, c. 526, §§2,3 (AMD). PL 1979, c. 541, §§A99-A103 (AMD). PL 1987, c. 625, §1 (AMD). RR 1991, c. 2, §35 (COR). PL 1991, c. 805, §3 (AMD). PL 1993, c. 293, §§B1-3 (AMD). PL 1999, c. 699, §§B2-4 (AMD). PL 1999, c. 699, §B28 (AFF). PL 2009, c. 325, Pt. A, §1 (RP). PL 2009, c. 325, Pt. A, §4 (AFF).
The Revisor's Office cannot provide legal advice or interpretation of Maine law to the public.
If you need legal advice, please consult a qualified attorney.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 20 cases, 1978–2010 · leading case: Maine Farmers Exch., Inc. v. Farm Credit of Maine, A.C.A., 2002 ME 18 (Me. 2002).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Maine Farmers Exch., Inc. v. Farm Credit of Maine, A.C.A., 2002 ME 18 (Me. 2002). · cites it 4× “"Buying" may be for cash or by exchange of other property or on secured or unsecured credit and includes receiving goods or documents of title under a preexisting contract for sale but does not include a transfer in bulk or as security for or in total or partial satisfaction of…”
Perrino v. Salem, Inc., 243 B.R. 550 (D. Me. 1999). · cites it 5× “See 11 M.R.S.A. § 1-201(14) (“[delivery with respect to an instrument .”
Todd Equip. Leasing Co. v. Milligan, 395 A.2d 818 (Me. 1978). · cites it 3× “” 11 M.R.S.A. § 1-201(10). The Plaintiff objected to the presiding justice’s instructions to the jury which permitted the jury to “categorize the nature of the printing.”
Hannaford Bros. Co. v. State Tax Assessor, 487 A.2d 251 (Me. 1985). · cites it 3× “Probably the most effective is to examine what residual interest the “lessor” retains at the end of the contract term.”
Ocean Nat'l Bank of Kennebunk v. Odell, 444 A.2d 422 (Me. 1982). “Further, the nature of the property involved when the recognized market exception applies will in most instances be fungible, see 11 M.R.S.A. §§ 1-201(17), 8-107, Comment 1; compare Norton v.”
McLaughlin v. Denharco, Inc., 129 F. Supp. 2d 32 (D. Me. 2001). “” 11 M.R.S.A. § 1-201(10) (West 1995). The Law Court has held that the language of the disclaimer was conspicuous where it was the only sentence in larger type in the warranty.”
United States v. H & S REALTY CO., 647 F. Supp. 1415 (D. Me. 1986). “What is less clear is the definition of good faith that Maine would apply to the lender-guarantor relationship here at issue: the UCC standard of “honesty in fact,” see Me.Rev.Stat.Ann. tit. 11, §§ 1-201(19), 1-203 (1964), or the Restatement (Second) of Contracts § 205 (1981)…”
Measurex Sys., Inc. v. State Tax Assessor, 490 A.2d 1192 (Me. 1985). “See 11 M.R.S.A. § 1-201(37) (1964). Therefore, we conclude that the transactions between Measurex and the paper companies have not been demonstrated to be leases “in lieu of purchase.”
Agway, Inc. v. Ernst, 394 A.2d 774 (Me. 1978). “See 11 M.R.S.A. § 1-201(25) and Comments, as respects the Code definition of ‘notice’.”
Hous. Sec., Inc. v. Maine Nat'l Bank, 391 A.2d 311 (Me. 1978). “See 11 M.R.S.A. § 1-201(10) and Comment thereto (definition of “conspicuous”); Barclays Bank D.”
Triple-A Baseball Club Assocs. v. Ne. Baseball, Inc., 655 F. Supp. 513 (D. Me. 1987). “See Me.Rev.Stat.Ann. tit. 11, § 1-201(19) (1964).”
Woods v. Bath Indus. Sales, Inc., 549 A.2d 1129 (Me. 1988). “” 11 M.R.S.A. § 1-201(19) (1964). Quoting the decision of the referee in bankruptcy, the court stated: “A secured party cannot claim that it is being completely honest when it files a financing statement knowing that it will be indexed under a name that will be in use only so…”
Show all 20 citing cases →
— Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 11, § 1-201(10) — 3 cases
Todd Equip. Leasing Co. v. Milligan, 395 A.2d 818 (Me. 1978). “” 11 M.R.S.A. § 1-201(10). The Plaintiff objected to the presiding justice’s instructions to the jury which permitted the jury to “categorize the nature of the printing.”
McLaughlin v. Denharco, Inc., 129 F. Supp. 2d 32 (D. Me. 2001). “” 11 M.R.S.A. § 1-201(10) (West 1995). The Law Court has held that the language of the disclaimer was conspicuous where it was the only sentence in larger type in the warranty.”
Hous. Sec., Inc. v. Maine Nat'l Bank, 391 A.2d 311 (Me. 1978). “See 11 M.R.S.A. § 1-201(10) and Comment thereto (definition of “conspicuous”); Barclays Bank D.”
— Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 11, § 1-201(14) — 2 cases
Perrino v. Salem, Inc., 243 B.R. 550 (D. Me. 1999). “See 11 M.R.S.A. § 1-201(14) (“[delivery with respect to an instrument .”
Perrino v. Salem, Inc. (In Re Mainely Payroll, Inc.), 233 B.R. 591 (Bankr. D. Me. 1999).
— Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 11, § 1-201(17) — 1 case
Ocean Nat'l Bank of Kennebunk v. Odell, 444 A.2d 422 (Me. 1982). “Further, the nature of the property involved when the recognized market exception applies will in most instances be fungible, see 11 M.R.S.A. §§ 1-201(17), 8-107, Comment 1; compare Norton v.”
— Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 11, § 1-201(19) — 3 cases
United States v. H & S REALTY CO., 647 F. Supp. 1415 (D. Me. 1986). “What is less clear is the definition of good faith that Maine would apply to the lender-guarantor relationship here at issue: the UCC standard of “honesty in fact,” see Me.Rev.Stat.Ann. tit. 11, §§ 1-201(19), 1-203 (1964), or the Restatement (Second) of Contracts § 205 (1981)…”
Triple-A Baseball Club Assocs. v. Ne. Baseball, Inc., 655 F. Supp. 513 (D. Me. 1987). “See Me.Rev.Stat.Ann. tit. 11, § 1-201(19) (1964).”
Woods v. Bath Indus. Sales, Inc., 549 A.2d 1129 (Me. 1988). “” 11 M.R.S.A. § 1-201(19) (1964). Quoting the decision of the referee in bankruptcy, the court stated: “A secured party cannot claim that it is being completely honest when it files a financing statement knowing that it will be indexed under a name that will be in use only so…”
— Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 11, § 1-201(20) — 1 case
Perrino v. Salem, Inc., 243 B.R. 550 (D. Me. 1999). “See 11 M.R.S.A. § 1-201(14) (“[delivery with respect to an instrument .”
— Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 11, § 1-201(25) — 2 cases
Agway, Inc. v. Ernst, 394 A.2d 774 (Me. 1978). “See 11 M.R.S.A. § 1-201(25) and Comments, as respects the Code definition of ‘notice’.”
Cummings v. Limington Sand & Gravel (Me. Super. Ct 2008).
— Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 11, § 1-201(26) — 1 case
Cummings v. Limington Sand & Gravel (Me. Super. Ct 2008).
— Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 11, § 1-201(30) — 1 case
Perrino v. Salem, Inc., 243 B.R. 550 (D. Me. 1999). “See 11 M.R.S.A. § 1-201(14) (“[delivery with respect to an instrument .”
— Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 11, § 1-201(37) — 6 cases
Hannaford Bros. Co. v. State Tax Assessor, 487 A.2d 251 (Me. 1985). “Probably the most effective is to examine what residual interest the “lessor” retains at the end of the contract term.”
Measurex Sys., Inc. v. State Tax Assessor, 490 A.2d 1192 (Me. 1985). “See 11 M.R.S.A. § 1-201(37) (1964). Therefore, we conclude that the transactions between Measurex and the paper companies have not been demonstrated to be leases “in lieu of purchase.”
FDIC v. Caliendo, 802 F. Supp. 575 (D.N.H. 1992).
E. Leasing Corp. v. Pye (In Re Pye), 13 B.R. 307 (Bankr. D. Me. 1981).
State v. Nelson, 714 A.2d 832 (Me. 1998).
— Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 11, § 1-201(9) — 2 cases
Maine Farmers Exch., Inc. v. Farm Credit of Maine, A.C.A., 2002 ME 18 (Me. 2002). “"Buying" may be for cash or by exchange of other property or on secured or unsecured credit and includes receiving goods or documents of title under a preexisting contract for sale but does not include a transfer in bulk or as security for or in total or partial satisfaction of…”
Key Bank of Maine v. Estes, 669 A.2d 162 (Me. 1995).
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.