Me. Rev. Stat. » Title 14
Maine Revised Statutes

Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 14, § 159 (2026)

Social and business invitees, standards of care

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ME-LEGlegislature.maine.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
The standards of care for a social invitee shall be the same as that of a business invitee.   [PL 1967, c. 366 (NEW).]
SECTION HISTORY
PL 1967, c. 366 (NEW).
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 9 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1977–2022 · leading case: Lonergan v. May, 53 S.W.3d 122 (Mo. Ct. App. 2001).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Lonergan v. May, 53 S.W.3d 122 (Mo. Ct. App. 2001). · cites it 2× “§§ 9:2791, 9:2795 (West 1997); Me.Rev.Stat. Ann. tit. 14, § 159 A (West Supp.”
Poulin v. Colby Coll., 402 A.2d 846 (Me. 1979). “The historical distinction between social and business invitees was abolished by 14 M.R.S.A. § 159 (Supp. 1978). 4 . Our cases are not without some confusion, however.”
Ferguson v. Bretton, 375 A.2d 225 (Me. 1977). “By statute (14 M.R.S.A. § 159) the duty owed to a social invitee on the premises of a landlord is the same as the duty owed to a business invitee.”
Patterson v. United States, 599 F. Supp. 2d 34 (D. Me. 2009). “’’ 14 M.R.S.A. § 159; Stow, 204 F.Supp.2d at 43 .”
Stow v. Peterson, 204 F. Supp. 2d 40 (D. Me. 2002). “See 14 M.R.S.A. § 159. That is, the duty of exercising reasonable care to provide a reasonably safe premises.”
Whitney v. Cassidy (D. Me. 2022). “14 M.R.S. § 159- A(2) (emphasis added). Section 159-A(3) makes clear that an occupant who “gives permission to another to pursue recreational .”
DeCambra v. Carson (Me. Super. Ct 2007). “14 M.R.S.A. § 159 (2006). 4 DeCambra makes a similar argument for a duty of care to St.”
Wing v. Davric Maine Corp. (Me. Super. Ct 2009). “The issue turns on whether 14 M.R.S. §159-~~applies to Scarborough Downs under the circumstances of this case.”
Redmond v. Galli (Me. Super. Ct 2015). “See 14 M.R.S.A. § 159. 6 b. Whether the Plaintiff Has Produced Sufficient Evidence to Show that the Defendant Breached Her Duty to Provide a Reasonably Safe Premises A landowner is not obliged to guarantee absolute safety, but must use ordinary care ensure the premises are safe…”
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.