Me. Rev. Stat. » Title 17
Maine Revised Statutes

Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 17, § 2701 (2026)

Action for damages caused by nuisance

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ME-LEGlegislature.maine.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
Any person injured in his comfort, property or the enjoyment of his estate by a common and public or a private nuisance may maintain against the offender a civil action for his damages, unless otherwise specially provided.  
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 24 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1990–2025 · leading case: Charlton v. Town of Oxford, 2001 ME 104 (Me. 2001).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Charlton v. Town of Oxford, 2001 ME 104 (Me. 2001). · cites it 26× “DISCUSSION [¶ 9] The Charltons contend that they have suffered an injury to the comfort, use, and enjoyment of their estate and that, consequently, they may bring statutory causes of action, pursuant to 17 M.”
Johnston v. Me. Energy Recovery, Ltd. P'ship, 2010 ME 52 (Me. 2010). · cites it 7× “Because we conclude that 17 M.R.S. § 2701 (2009) provides the statutory basis for an award of damages when the elements of a private nuisance are proved pursuant to either common law or a specific statutory provision, we vacate the judgment.”
Peter M. Beckerman v. Ricky Conant, 2017 ME 142 (Me. 2017). “[¶ 7] The Conants counterclaimed, asserting one count of statutory nuisance pursuant to 17 M.R.S. § 2701 (2016), one count of common law nuisance, and one count of trespass.”
Guidi v. Town of Turner, 2004 ME 42 (Me. 2004). “They assert that Jordan’s operation created a nuisance, see 17 M.R.S.A. §§ 2701, 2804 (1983), harming the Guidis’ property by polluting the Nez-inscot River, polluting ground waters and constituting “a blight on the landscape.”
Hanlin Grp., Inc. v. Int'l Minerals & Chem. Corp., 759 F. Supp. 925 (D. Me. 1990). “See 17 M.R.S.A. § 2701. 15 . In so concluding I note that the special injury requirement would be rendered meaningless if every plaintiff could merely allege injury to the use and enjoyment of its property when such an allegation does not distinguish between injuries distinct…”
Murray v. Bath Iron Works Corp., 867 F. Supp. 33 (D. Me. 1994). “17 M.R.S.A. § 2701; Pettengill v. Turo, 159 Me.”
E. Maine Med. Ctr. v. Walgreen Co., 2025 ME 10 (Me. 2025). · cites it 3× “The Hospitals’ complaint recites that their nuisance claim is brought under the common law and 17 M.R.S. § 2701 (2024), which applies to public nuisances and private nuisances and “provides a cause of action for damages for a common law nuisance.”
Saco Steel Co. v. Saco Def., Inc., 910 F. Supp. 803 (D. Me. 1995). “§ 1319-U(5) (Count II); public and private nuisance under Maine law, 17 M.R.S.A. § 2701 (Count III); wrongful involvement in litigation under Maine law (Count IV); contractual indemnification under Maine law (Count V); contribution under the common law of Maine (Count VI);…”
Richard Tranfield v. Patricia Arcuni-English, 2019 ME 135 (Me. 2019). “2 Pursuant to 17 M.R.S. § 2701 (2018), “Any person injured in his comfort, property or the enjoyment of his estate by a common and public or a private nuisance may maintain against the offender a civil action for his damages, unless otherwise specially provided.”
Richard Tranfield v. Patricia Arcuni-English, 2019 ME 135 (Me. 2019). “2 Pursuant to 17 M.R.S. § 2701 (2018), “Any person injured in his comfort, property or the enjoyment of his estate by a common and public or a private nuisance may maintain against the offender a civil action for his damages, unless otherwise specially provided.”
Johnston v. Maine Energy Recovery Co. (Me. Super. Ct 2009). · cites it 4× “AMENDED COMPLAINT The plaintiff filed an amended complaint for nuisance based on two Maine statutes, 17 M.R.S.A. §2701 and §2802 and upon the common law doctrine of a private nuisance.”
Latouf v. Barnard (Me. Super. Ct 2023). · cites it 2× “The CoUli therefore also enters judgment for Mr. Barnard on Count IV of the Amended Complaint.”
Show all 24 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.