Maine Revised Statutes

Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 14, § 5951 (2026)

Uniformity of interpretation; title

✓ current as of May 2026

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

This chapter shall be so interpreted and construed as to effectuate their general purpose to make uniform the law of those states which enact them, and to harmonize, as far as possible, with federal laws and regulations on the subject of declaratory judgments and decrees; and may be cited as the "Uniform Declaratory Judgments Act."

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 69 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1965–2024 · leading case: Baybutt Constr. Corp. v. Com. Union Ins., 455 A.2d 914 (Me. 1983).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Baybutt Constr. Corp. v. Com. Union Ins., 455 A.2d 914 (Me. 1983). “*917 The plaintiff then brought the instant action in the Superior Court pursuant to 14 M.R.S.A. §§ 5951 — 5968, seeking a judgment which declared that the provisions of its insurance contract with the defendant obligated the defendant both to cover and defend the plaintiff in…”

Berry v. Daigle, 322 A.2d 320 (Me. 1974). · cites it 2× “In addition to seeking an order of abatement, the Plaintiff also seeks declaratory relief pursuant to 14 M.R.S.A. § 5951 et seq. to establish the constitutionality of the tax and the relative rights of the parties.”

Friedlander v. Hiram Ricker & Sons, Inc., 485 A.2d 965 (Me. 1984). · cites it 2× “Plaintiffs commenced the present action in 1983 by filing a complaint pursuant to the Uniform Declaratory Judgments Act (14 M.R.S.A. § 5951 et seq. (1980)). The complaint sought a declaration that the restrictive covenant was invalid and unenforceable.”

L. Ray Packing Co. v. Com. Union Ins., 469 A.2d 832 (Me. 1983). “Upon receipt of a request to defend the underlying action, the defendants denied coverage and the plaintiff commenced an action for declaratory judgment pursuant to 14 M.R.S.A. §§ 5951 et seq. (1980) in which it sought a judgment declaring that its insurance contracts with the…”

J.M. Huber Corp. v. Main-Erbauer, Inc., 493 A.2d 1048 (Me. 1985). · cites it 2× “Because those avenues are exclusive, we rejected the Cape Elizabeth School Board’s attempt to have the substantive arbitrability of the dispute determined under the Declaratory Judgments Act, 14 M.R.S.A. §§ 5951 et seq. (1980). Though Cape Elizabeth concerned a collective…”

Nat'l Hearing Aid Centers, Inc. v. Smith, 376 A.2d 456 (Me. 1977). “We sustain the appeal and remand for entry of judgment consistent with this opinion.”

Allstate Ins. Co. v. Lyons, 400 A.2d 349 (Me. 1979). “Jurisdiction under the Uniform Declaratory Judgments Act, 14 M.R.S.A. §§ 5951 et seq., turns upon the presence of a real controversy.”

LaPointe v. City of Saco, 419 A.2d 1013 (Me. 1980). “80B, and 14 M.R.S.A. § 5951 et seq., the plaintiffs appealed to the Superior Court.”

Hamm v. Hamm, 584 A.2d 59 (Me. 1990). “As a result, Chester filed a complaint for a declaratory judgment pursuant to 14 M.R.S.A. § 5951 et seq. (1980 & Supp.1986) seeking to have *61 the court declare the rights of the parties on these two issues.”

ALC Dev. Corp. v. Walker, 2002 ME 11 (Me. 2002). “14 M.R.S.A § 5951 (1980) provides: Uniformity of interpretation: title This chapter shall be so interpreted and construed as to effectuate their general purpose to make uniform the law of those states which enact them, and to harmonize, as far as possible, with federal laws and…”

McNicholas v. York Beach Vill. Corp., 394 A.2d 264 (Me. 1978). “At common law, declaratory relief was generally unavailable but Maine’s adoption of the Uniform Declaratory Judgment Act, 14 M.R.S.A. § 5951 et seq., offered a new procedural vehicle to invoke the judicial machinery in an otherwise proper case, However, in order to obtain de…”

Brunswick Citizens for Collaborative Gov't v. Town of Brunswick, 189 A.3d 248 (Me. 2018). “The Declaratory Judgments Act, 14 M.R.S. §§ 5951 - 5963 (2017), "does not present an exception to the justiciability rule.”

Show all 69 citing cases →

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.