Maine Revised Statutes

Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 11, § 2-309 (2026)

Absence of specific time provisions; notice of termination

✓ current as of May 2026

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

(1). The time for shipment or delivery or any other action under a contract if not provided in this Article or agreed upon shall be a reasonable time.

(2). Where the contract provides for successive performances but is indefinite in duration it is valid for a reasonable time but unless otherwise agreed may be terminated at any time by either party.

(3). Termination of a contract by one party except on the happening of an agreed event requires that reasonable notification be received by the other party and an agreement dispensing with notification is invalid if its operation would be unconscionable.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 3 cases, 1978–2011 · leading case: Agway, Inc. v. Ernst, 394 A.2d 774 (Me. 1978).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Agway, Inc. v. Ernst, 394 A.2d 774 (Me. 1978). · cites it 2× “The provisions of 11 M.R.S.A. § 2-309(2) are therefore, applicable: Where the contract provides for successive performance but is infinite in duration it is valid for a reasonable time but unless otherwise agreed may be terminated at any time by either party.”

Fitzpatrick v. TELEFLEX, INC., 763 F. Supp. 2d 224 (D. Me. 2011). “1978) (addressing requirement of notice concerning price change in an oral contract involving successive orders for agricultural feed); see also 11 M.R.S. § 2-309(3) (“Termination of a contract by one party except on the happening of an agreed event requires that reasonable…”

Schiavi Mobile Homes, Inc. v. Gagne, 510 A.2d 236 (Me. 1986). · cites it 2× “See 11 M.R.S.A. § 2-309 comments 5-6 (1964) (reasonable time for tender may be enlarged where parties let originally reasonable time go by in silence or where buyer does not object to seller’s time proposal).”

— Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 11, § 2-309(1) — 1 case

Schiavi Mobile Homes, Inc. v. Gagne, 510 A.2d 236 (Me. 1986). “See 11 M.R.S.A. § 2-309 comments 5-6 (1964) (reasonable time for tender may be enlarged where parties let originally reasonable time go by in silence or where buyer does not object to seller’s time proposal).”

— Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 11, § 2-309(2) — 1 case

Agway, Inc. v. Ernst, 394 A.2d 774 (Me. 1978). “The provisions of 11 M.R.S.A. § 2-309(2) are therefore, applicable: Where the contract provides for successive performance but is infinite in duration it is valid for a reasonable time but unless otherwise agreed may be terminated at any time by either party.”

— Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 11, § 2-309(3) — 2 cases

Agway, Inc. v. Ernst, 394 A.2d 774 (Me. 1978). “The provisions of 11 M.R.S.A. § 2-309(2) are therefore, applicable: Where the contract provides for successive performance but is infinite in duration it is valid for a reasonable time but unless otherwise agreed may be terminated at any time by either party.”

Fitzpatrick v. TELEFLEX, INC., 763 F. Supp. 2d 224 (D. Me. 2011). “1978) (addressing requirement of notice concerning price change in an oral contract involving successive orders for agricultural feed); see also 11 M.R.S. § 2-309(3) (“Termination of a contract by one party except on the happening of an agreed event requires that reasonable…”

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.