Maine Revised Statutes

Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 14, § 5953 (2026)

Scope

✓ current as of May 2026

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

Courts of record within their respective jurisdictions shall have power to declare rights, status and other legal relations whether or not further relief is or could be claimed. No action or proceeding shall be open to objection on the ground that a declaratory judgment or decree is prayed for. The declaration may be either affirmative or negative in form and effect. Such declarations shall have the force and effect of a final judgment or decree.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 69 cases (6 in the last 5 years), 1972–2024 · leading case: Coastal Ventures v. Alsham Plaza, LLC, 2010 ME 63 (Me. 2010).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Coastal Ventures v. Alsham Plaza, LLC, 2010 ME 63 (Me. 2010). “Coastal sought a declaratory judgment, pursuant to 14 M.R.S. §§ 5953, 5955 (2009), regarding its rights and obligations under the non-competition agreement, and specifically asked: (1) whether Coastal would violate the agreement by selling the gas station or hardware store to a…”

Joyce v. State, 2008 ME 108 (Me. 2008). · cites it 2× “See 14 M.R.S. §§ 5953, 5954 (2007) (providing that courts have the power to declare rights of a person affected by a statute or municipal ordinance).”

Richard Cayer v. Town of Madawaska, 2016 ME 143 (Me. 2016). “57 and 14 M.R.S. § 5953 (2015); in Count III, damages and attorney fees, pursuant to 42 U.”

Friedlander v. Hiram Ricker & Sons, Inc., 485 A.2d 965 (Me. 1984). · cites it 2× “Robert and Ernest Friedlander, the plaintiff-trustees, pursuant to 14 M.R.S.A. §§ 5953 and 5955, the Uniform Declaratory Judgments Act of Maine, sought to obtain in Superior Court (Androscoggin County) a judgment declaring unenforceable a restrictive covenant contained in a deed…”

U.S. Bank Nat'l Ass'n v. Jim A. Gordon, 2020 ME 33 (Me. 2020). “See generally 14 M.R.S. §§ 5953 (giving courts authority “to declare rights, status and other legal relations whether or not further relief is or could be claimed”), 6651 (describing the nature of a quiet title action) (2018).”

ALC Dev. Corp. v. Walker, 2002 ME 11 (Me. 2002). “” 14 M.R.S.A. § 5953 (1980) provides: Scope Courts of record within their respective jurisdictions shall have power to declare rights, status and other legal relations whether or not further relief is or could be claimed.”

Perry v. Hartford Accident & Indem. Co., 481 A.2d 133 (Me. 1984). “Finding that plaintiff’s claim failed to present a “real controversy,” the Superior Court granted defendant’s motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim upon which relief could be granted, treating the motion as one for summary judgment.”

C.E.W. v. D.E.W., 845 A.2d 1146 (Me. 2004). “2003) (emphasis added); see also 14 M.R.S.A. § 5953 (2003) ("Courts of record within their respective jurisdictions shall have power to declare rights, status and other legal relations whether or not further relief is or could be claimed.”

Maine Cent. R.R. v. Town of Dexter, 588 A.2d 289 (Me. 1991). “Ac *293 cordingly, the Town argues that because MCRR did not challenge the 1989-90 tax in an abatement procedure, the Superior Court improperly rendered a judgment pursuant to 14 M.R.S.A. § 5953 declaring the 1989-90 tax invalid.”

Michael Zani et al. v. Medora Zani et al., 2023 ME 42 (Me. 2023). “See 14 M.R.S. § 5953 (2023) (“Courts of record within their respective jurisdictions shall have power to declare rights, status and other legal relations whether or not further relief is or could be claimed.”

Virginia Parker v. Dep't of Inland Fisheries & Wildlife, 2024 ME 22 (Me. 2024). “” 14 M.R.S. § 5953. We have held that the Act “should be liberally construed to allow consideration of the rights of parties relative to the validity or interpretation of statutes.”

York Mut. Ins. Co. of Maine v. Mooers, 415 A.2d 564 (Me. 1980). “Each of the defendants sought a similar declaration.”

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.