Maine Revised Statutes
Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 14, § 5945 (2026)
Appeals
✓ laws through the 2025 session (checked Sept. 2026)
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
ME-LEGlegislature.maine.gov
JustiaTitle on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
1.
Grounds for appeal.
An appeal may be taken from:
A.
An order denying an application to compel arbitration made under section 5928;
[PL 1967, c. 430 (NEW).]
B.
An order granting an application to stay arbitration made under section 5928, subsection 2;
[PL 1967, c. 430 (NEW).]
C.
An order confirming or denying confirmation of an award;
[PL 1967, c. 430 (NEW).]
D.
An order modifying or correcting an award;
[PL 1967, c. 430 (NEW).]
E.
An order vacating an award without directing a rehearing; or
[PL 1967, c. 430 (NEW).]
F.
A judgment or decree entered pursuant to the provisions of this chapter.
[PL 1967, c. 430 (NEW).]
[PL 1967, c. 430 (NEW).]
2.
Procedure.
The appeal shall be taken in the manner and to the same extent as from orders or judgments in a civil action.
[PL 1967, c. 430 (NEW).]
SECTION HISTORY
PL 1967, c. 430 (NEW).
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 32
cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1978–2024 · leading case: Maine Dep't of Transp. v. Maine State Employees Ass'n, 581 A.2d 813 (Me. 1990).
Maine Dep't of Transp. v. Maine State Employees Ass'n, 581 A.2d 813 (Me. 1990). “Although the Superior Court has taken no action on the second award, 1 MSEA brought this appeal challenging not the second award, which it concedes cannot be contested on its merits, but the Superior Court order vacating the first award.”
Barrett v. McDonald Investments, Inc., 2005 ME 43, 870 A.2d 146. “The Barretts argue that the Agreement governs the administration of a custodial account, not misrepresentations about the nature and operation of the Manulife annuity and GRIP rider.”
East Texas Salt Water Disposal Co. v. Werline, 307 S.W.3d 267 (Tex. 2010). “220; Me. Rev.Stat. Ann. tit. 14, § 5945; Mass.”
Maine Cent. R.R. v. Bangor & Aroostook R.R., 395 A.2d 1107 (Me. 1978). “This appeal, premised on 14 M.R.S.A. § 5945, 3 followed. This appeal presents two major issues for our consideration.”
James G. Stanley Jr. v. Michael A. Liberty, 2015 ME 21, 111 A.3d 663. “” [¶ 22] On April 22, 2014, the court granted Stanley’s motion for entry of judgment, declining to adopt certain additional clarifying language regarding the acceleration clause as requested by Liberty and the Liberty corporate entities.”
Susan R. Snow v. Bernstein, Shur, Sawyer & Nelson, P.A., 2017 ME 239, 176 A.3d 729. “The court further concluded that, because an attorney’s obligation to obtain the informed consent of his clients does not apply solely to arbitration agreements, requiring informed consent in this context was not preempted by the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA), 9 U.”
Cape Elizabeth Sch. Bd. v. Cape Elizabeth Teachers Ass'n, 435 A.2d 1381 (Me. 1981). “The Uniform Arbitration Act sets forth the grounds for appeal in 14 M.R.S.A. § 5945. 3 Noticeably absent is any provision for an appeal from a denial of a stay of arbitration.”
Champagne v. Victory Homes, Inc., 2006 ME 58, 897 A.2d 803. “’s Motion to Alter or Amend Judgment is DENIED in its entirety and the parties are ordered to engage in nonbinding arbitration within 60 days.” Victory moved to reconsider or, in the alternative, to report the case to us for interlocutory review.”
Leete & Lemieux, P.A. v. Horowitz, 2012 ME 115, 53 A.3d 1106. “Title 14 M.R.S. § 5945 (2011) provides, in relevant part: 1.”
Saga Commc'ns of New England, Inc. v. Voornas, 2000 ME 156, 756 A.2d 954. “Voor-nas refused, and Saga responded with yet another expedited motion, this time seeking to stay the proceedings and compel arbitration pursuant to 14 M.”
Patricia Sarchi v. Uber Tech., Inc., 2022 ME 8, 268 A.3d 258. “3 Although no final judgment has been entered in this case, interlocutory appeals from “order[s] denying an application to compel arbitration” are permitted by 14 M.R.S. § 5945(1)(A) (2021). This appeal thus falls within an exception to the final judgment rule and is reviewable…”
Marshwood Assocs. v. KRUMBHAAR & HOLT, 451 A.2d 305 (Me. 1982). “This Court has not had occasion to determine whether the other provisions of 14 M.R.S.A. § 5945 3 also lie within that exception.”
Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 14, § 5945(1): 6 cases
Barrett v. McDonald Investments, Inc., 2005 ME 43, 870 A.2d 146. “The Barretts argue that the Agreement governs the administration of a custodial account, not misrepresentations about the nature and operation of the Manulife annuity and GRIP rider.”
James G. Stanley Jr. v. Michael A. Liberty, 2015 ME 21, 111 A.3d 663. “” [¶ 22] On April 22, 2014, the court granted Stanley’s motion for entry of judgment, declining to adopt certain additional clarifying language regarding the acceleration clause as requested by Liberty and the Liberty corporate entities.”
Maine Dep't of Transp. v. Maine State Employees Ass'n, 581 A.2d 813 (Me. 1990). “Although the Superior Court has taken no action on the second award, 1 MSEA brought this appeal challenging not the second award, which it concedes cannot be contested on its merits, but the Superior Court order vacating the first award.”
J.M. Huber Corp. v. Main-Erbauer, Inc., 493 A.2d 1048 (Me. 1985).
State v. Philip Morris, Inc., 2007 ME 90, 928 A.2d 782.
Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 14, § 5945(1)(A): 14 cases
Susan R. Snow v. Bernstein, Shur, Sawyer & Nelson, P.A., 2017 ME 239, 176 A.3d 729. “The court further concluded that, because an attorney’s obligation to obtain the informed consent of his clients does not apply solely to arbitration agreements, requiring informed consent in this context was not preempted by the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA), 9 U.”
Champagne v. Victory Homes, Inc., 2006 ME 58, 897 A.2d 803. “’s Motion to Alter or Amend Judgment is DENIED in its entirety and the parties are ordered to engage in nonbinding arbitration within 60 days.” Victory moved to reconsider or, in the alternative, to report the case to us for interlocutory review.”
Saga Commc'ns of New England, Inc. v. Voornas, 2000 ME 156, 756 A.2d 954. “Voor-nas refused, and Saga responded with yet another expedited motion, this time seeking to stay the proceedings and compel arbitration pursuant to 14 M.”
Patricia Sarchi v. Uber Tech., Inc., 2022 ME 8, 268 A.3d 258. “3 Although no final judgment has been entered in this case, interlocutory appeals from “order[s] denying an application to compel arbitration” are permitted by 14 M.R.S. § 5945(1)(A) (2021). This appeal thus falls within an exception to the final judgment rule and is reviewable…”
Maine Dep't of Transp. v. Maine State Employees Ass'n, 581 A.2d 813 (Me. 1990). “Although the Superior Court has taken no action on the second award, 1 MSEA brought this appeal challenging not the second award, which it concedes cannot be contested on its merits, but the Superior Court order vacating the first award.”
Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 14, § 5945(1)(C): 8 cases
Maine Dep't of Transp. v. Maine State Employees Ass'n, 581 A.2d 813 (Me. 1990). “Although the Superior Court has taken no action on the second award, 1 MSEA brought this appeal challenging not the second award, which it concedes cannot be contested on its merits, but the Superior Court order vacating the first award.”
Anderson v. Banks, 2012 ME 6, 37 A.3d 915.
Leete & Lemieux, P.A. v. Horowitz, 2012 ME 115, 53 A.3d 1106. “Title 14 M.R.S. § 5945 (2011) provides, in relevant part: 1.”
Concord Gen. Mut. Ins. v. N. Assurance Co., 603 A.2d 470 (Me. 1992).
Tizz Crowley-King v. Kennebec Valley Radiology, P.A., 580 A.2d 687 (Me. 1990).
Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 14, § 5945(1)(E): 1 case
Reg'l Sch. Unit No. 5 v. The Coastal Educ. Ass'n, 2015 ME 98, 121 A.3d 98.
Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 14, § 5945(1)(c): 1 case
Maine Cent. R.R. v. Bangor & Aroostook R.R., 395 A.2d 1107 (Me. 1978). “This appeal, premised on 14 M.R.S.A. § 5945, 3 followed. This appeal presents two major issues for our consideration.”
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.