Me. Rev. Stat. » Title 24-A
Maine Revised Statutes

Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 24-A, § 2155 (2026)

"Twisting" prohibited

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ME-LEGlegislature.maine.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
No person shall make or issue, or cause to be made or issued, any written or oral statement misrepresenting or making incomplete comparisons as to the terms, conditions, or benefits contained in any policy for the purpose of inducing or attempting or tending to induce the policyholder to lapse, forfeit, borrow against, surrender, retain, exchange, modify, convert, or otherwise affect or dispose of any insurance policy.   [PL 1969, c. 132, §1 (NEW).]
SECTION HISTORY
PL 1969, c. 132, §1 (NEW).
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 5 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 2012–2021 · leading case: Paul A. Dyer v. Superintendent of Ins., 2013 ME 61 (Me. 2013).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Paul A. Dyer v. Superintendent of Ins., 2013 ME 61 (Me. 2013). “§ 2153 (2012) (prohibiting misrepresentation of any policy), and 24-A M.R.S. § 2155 (2012) (prohibiting misrepresentation of the terms of a policy for the purpose of effectuating an exchange).”
Est. of Marion Sprague v. Bankers Life & Cas. Co., 2021 ME 64 (Me. 2021). · cites it 2× “[¶6] The Estate filed a complaint on September 4, 2020, in the Superior Court (York County) alleging breach of contract (Count 1), detrimental reliance (Count 2), impossibility of performance (Count 4), quantum meruit (Count 5), and violation of 24-A M.R.S.A. § 2155 (2021)…”
Bankers Life & Cas. Co. v. Superintendent of Ins., 2013 ME 7 (Me. 2013). “§ 1420-K(1)(H); and had made misleading comparisons between the woman’s existing investments and those offered by Bankers Life in violation of 24-A M.R.S. § 2155. 4 [¶ 13] The Superintendent held Bankers Life accountable for Juliano’s actions because he was acting as its agent…”
Bankers Life & Cas. Co. v. Superintendent of Ins. (Me. Super. Ct 2012). · cites it 4× “§ 1420-K(l)(H) (2010), one violation of 24-A M.R.S. § 2155 (2010), and four 4 violations of 02-0.”
Dyer v. Superintendent of Ins. (Me. Super. Ct 2012). · cites it 2× “§ 2155 The Superintendent concluded that two of Dyer's acts were two violations of 24-A M.R.S. § 2155: 1) representing to Van Horn that she would receive 6-7% interest on the SPIA, and 2) failing to provide Van Horn with an adequate explanation of the SPIA.”
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.