Maine Revised Statutes

Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 23, § 3032 (2026)

Proposed, unaccepted ways deemed vacated

✓ current as of May 2026

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

1. Deemed vacation.

[PL 1997, c. 386, §1 (RP).]

1-A. Deemed vacation. A proposed, unaccepted way or portion of a proposed, unaccepted way laid out on a subdivision plan recorded in the registry of deeds prior to September 29, 1987 is deemed to have been subject to an order of vacation under section 3027 if, by the later of 15 years after the date of the recording of the subdivision plan laying out the way or portion of the way or September 29, 1997, both of the following conditions have been met:

A. The way or portion of the way has not been constructed or used as a way; and [PL 1997, c. 386, §2 (NEW).]

B. The way or portion of the way has not been accepted as a town, county or state way or highway or as a public, utility or recreational easement. [PL 1997, c. 386, §2 (NEW).]

A way or portion of a way considered vacated under this subsection is subject to section 3033.

[PL 1997, c. 386, §2 (NEW).]

2. Extensions. The municipal officers of the affected municipality may except a proposed, unaccepted way or portion of a proposed, unaccepted way described in subsection 1‑A from the operation of the time limitations of that subsection by filing, in the registry of deeds where the subdivision plan is recorded, a notice stating that the way or portion of the way is excepted from the operation of subsection 1‑A for a period of 20 years from the filing of the notice. To be effective, this exception must be filed prior to the expiration of the time limitations of subsection 1‑A. An extension accomplished under this subsection may be extended by the municipal officers for a subsequent 20-year period by the filing of a new notice within the preceding 20-year extension period.

[PL 1997, c. 683, Pt. B, §10 (AMD); PL 1997, c. 683, Pt. B, §11 (AFF).]

SECTION HISTORY

PL 1987, c. 385, §2 (NEW). PL 1997, c. 386, §§1,2 (AMD). PL 1997, c. 683, §B10 (AMD). PL 1997, c. 683, §B11 (AFF).

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 19 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1996–2024 · leading case: Lamson v. Cote, 2001 ME 109 (Me. 2001).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Lamson v. Cote, 2001 ME 109 (Me. 2001). · cites it 5× “§ 469-A (1999); see also 23 M.R.S.A. § 3032 (Supp.2000). The defendants, Mark and Marie Cote, own a nonwaterfront lot on the upland side of the perimeter road.”

Pilot Point, LLC v. Town of Cape Elizabeth, 2020 ME 100 (Me. 2020). · cites it 6× “There is also evidence of obstructions in the Pilot Point Section where it abuts lots 72, 74A, and 74B, such as a stone wall, lawns, gardens, and a wrought-iron fence.”

Ocean Point Colony Trust, Inc. v. Town of Boothbay, 739 A.2d 382 (Me. 1999). · cites it 8× “n Point argues that: (1) the Superior Court erred in granting the Town’s motion for a summary judgment because a genuine issue of material fact exists as to whether an incipient dedication of the proposed, but unaccepted way occurred; (2) the Town’s right to accept the proposed…”

Hartwell v. Stanley, 2002 ME 29 (Me. 2002). · cites it 2× “Stanley argues that the Hart-wells’ right of way has been extinguished by operation of 23 M.R.S.A. § 3032(1-A) (Supp.2001), and that the evidence was insufficient to establish that Stanley Road is a public way.”

Glidden v. Belden, 684 A.2d 1306 (Me. 1996). “See 23 M.R.S.A. § 3032(1). 14 . "The limitation periods in this section are not tolled or interrupted by any disability, minority, lack of knowledge or absence from this State by the claimant.”

Driscoll v. Mains, 2005 ME 52 (Me. 2005). “386, §§ 1-2 (effective September 19, 1997) (codified at 23 M.R.S.A. § 3032(1-A) (Supp.2004)). In this case, the City of Westbrook never accepted or developed the paper streets and they were vacated by operation of law on September 29,1997.”

Kinderhaus North LLC v. Karl Nicols, 2024 ME 34 (Me. 2024). “23 M.R.S. §§ 3032, 3033 (2024). On June 20, the Fullertons received a copy of the section 3033 Notice, and on June 28, through counsel, they disputed the applicability of section 3033.”

Gloria Carignan v. Paul R. Dumas Jr., 2017 ME 15 (Me. 2017). · cites it 7× “” [¶ 7] On May 15, 1997, the Town voted pursuant to 23 M.R.S.A. § 3032 (1997) to exempt from the time limitations of the Paper Streets Act certain paper streets in Rumford, but did not include Willow Street.”

Khalidi v. Town of Cape Elizabeth (Me. Super. Ct 2019). · cites it 6× “Later, the Ocean Point Colony opinion provides: Ocean Point argues that the Town’s right to accept the incipient dedication lapsed under common law because the Town did not accept the street within a reasonable time and 23 M.”

Kinderhaus North LLC v. Nicolas (Me. Super. Ct 2020). · cites it 6× “In early June, the Nicolases learned that the Town of Harpswell recorded notices in the Cumberland County Registry of Deeds to extend the deadline for automatic vacation of “paper streets” pursuant to 23 M.R.S. § 3032. (Pls.’ S.M.F. 27; Defs.”

John M. Carter v. Michael A. Voncannon, 2024 ME 65 (Me. 2024). “” 23 M.R.S. § 3032(1-A) (2024). Pursuant to section 3033, a person claiming ownership of a proposed, unaccepted way deemed vacated under section 3032 may record in the registry of deeds a notice of the claim and must mail any recorded notice to the current record owners and…”

Ray Ledges, LLC v. The Inhabitants of the Town of Harpswell (Me. Super. Ct 2017). · cites it 3× “) On May 5, 2016, Plaintiffs applied for a permit to build a septic system, a portion of which would be on the abutting paper street.”

Show all 19 citing cases →

— Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 23, § 3032(1) — 2 cases

Glidden v. Belden, 684 A.2d 1306 (Me. 1996). “See 23 M.R.S.A. § 3032(1). 14 . "The limitation periods in this section are not tolled or interrupted by any disability, minority, lack of knowledge or absence from this State by the claimant.”

Hartwell v. Town of Medway (Me. Super. Ct 2001).

— Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 23, § 3032(2) — 4 cases

Pilot Point, LLC v. Town of Cape Elizabeth, 2020 ME 100 (Me. 2020). “There is also evidence of obstructions in the Pilot Point Section where it abuts lots 72, 74A, and 74B, such as a stone wall, lawns, gardens, and a wrought-iron fence.”

Ocean Point Colony Trust, Inc. v. Town of Boothbay, 739 A.2d 382 (Me. 1999). “n Point argues that: (1) the Superior Court erred in granting the Town’s motion for a summary judgment because a genuine issue of material fact exists as to whether an incipient dedication of the proposed, but unaccepted way occurred; (2) the Town’s right to accept the proposed…”

Khalidi v. Town of Cape Elizabeth (Me. Super. Ct 2019). “Later, the Ocean Point Colony opinion provides: Ocean Point argues that the Town’s right to accept the incipient dedication lapsed under common law because the Town did not accept the street within a reasonable time and 23 M.”

Ray Ledges, LLC v. The Inhabitants of the Town of Harpswell (Me. Super. Ct 2017). “) On May 5, 2016, Plaintiffs applied for a permit to build a septic system, a portion of which would be on the abutting paper street.”

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.