Maine Revised Statutes

Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 14, § 8110 (2026)

Limitation of actions

✓ current as of May 2026

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

Every claim against a governmental entity or its employees permitted under this chapter is forever barred from the courts of this State, unless an action therein is begun within 2 years after the cause of action accrues, except that, if the claimant is a minor when the cause of action accrues, the action may be brought within 2 years of the minor's attaining 18 years of age. [PL 2001, c. 249, §2 (AMD).]

SECTION HISTORY

PL 1977, c. 2, §§2,5 (NEW). PL 1977, c. 591, §6 (AMD). PL 1979, c. 68, §5 (AMD). PL 2001, c. 249, §2 (AMD).

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 39 cases (6 in the last 5 years), 1981–2024 · leading case: McLaughlin v. Superintending Sch. Comm., 2003 ME 114 (Me. 2003).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

McLaughlin v. Superintending Sch. Comm., 2003 ME 114 (Me. 2003). · cites it 4× “See 14 M.R.S.A. § 8110 (2003). The Act is unambiguous.”

Faucher v. City of Auburn, 465 A.2d 1120 (Me. 1983). · cites it 2× “14 M.R.S.A. § 8110. 14 M.R.S.A. § 853 does toll several statutes of limitations during minority; the MTCA's limitations period is not included in that list.”

Givertz v. Maine Med. Ctr., 459 A.2d 548 (Me. 1983). · cites it 2× “[6] 14 M.R.S.A. § 8110. Limitation of actions Every claim against a governmental entity or its employees permitted under this chapter shall be forever barred from the courts of this State, unless an action therein is begun within 2 years after the cause of action accrues.”

Erickson v. State, 444 A.2d 345 (Me. 1982). · cites it 2× “§ 8104, and by including a two-year period of limitation, 14 M.R.S.A. § 8110. No support exists, however, for the proposition that the Legislature intended noncompliance with the notice provisions of the Act to operate as an additional limitation of exposure.”

Clockedile v. State Dep't of Transp., 437 A.2d 187 (Me. 1981). · cites it 2× “See 14 M.R.S.A. § 8110. However, 14 M.R.S.A. § 8113(2) 3 makes any statutory waiver of immunity outside the act the exclusive method of recovery in fact situations to which such other statute applies.”

Doe v. Graham, 977 A.2d 391 (Me. 2009). “Because we conclude that Doe’s civil rights claim is facially insufficient to present a viable due process challenge, we need not address the state action requirement or whether Graham and the security guards were state actors for the purposes of the Civil Rights Act. . Graham,…”

Darling v. Augusta Mental Health Inst., 535 A.2d 421 (Me. 1987). “14 M.R.S.A. § 8110. Plaintiff argues, however, that under the Maine Health Security Act, 24 M.”

Webb v. Haas, 1999 ME 74 (Me. 1999). “With regard to the state law claims, Haas also contends that the claims are barred by the Maine Tort Claims Act two-year statute of limitations, 14 M.R.S.A. § 8110 (1980), and that he is entitled to discretionary function immunity, 14 M.”

Hinkley v. Penobscot Valley Hosp., 2002 ME 70 (Me. 2002). “14 M.R.S.A. § 8110 (Supp.2001) provides: Every claim against a governmental entity or its employees permitted under this chapter is forever barred from the courts of this State, unless an action therein is begun within 2 years after the cause of action accrues, except that, if…”

Couturier v. Penobscot Indian Nation, 544 A.2d 306 (Me. 1988). · cites it 3× “The Superior Court determined that plaintiffs’ suit was time barred under 14 M.R.S.A. § 8110 (1980), the two-year statute of limitations provision of the Maine Tort Claims Act.”

Young v. Greater Portland Transit Dist., 535 A.2d 417 (Me. 1987). “§ 8107) and the statute of limitations (14 M.R.S.A. § 8110) of the Maine Tort Claims Act and then moved for summary judgment.”

Mueller v. Penobscot Valley Hosp., 538 A.2d 294 (Me. 1988). “§ 752 (1980)), is to be employed in suits brought pursuant to § 1983 and not the 2-year limitaion period found in 14 M.”

Show all 39 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.