Maine Revised Statutes

Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 29, § 2241 (2026)

Suspension or revocation of license, registration or fuel use decal

✓ current as of May 2026

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

(REPEALED)

SECTION HISTORY

PL 1969, c. 79 (AMD). PL 1969, c. 118 (AMD). PL 1971, c. 292, §1 (AMD). PL 1971, c. 345, §1 (AMD). PL 1973, c. 93 (AMD). PL 1973, c. 165 (AMD). PL 1973, c. 361 (AMD). PL 1975, c. 611 (AMD). PL 1975, c. 623, §§44-C (AMD). PL 1975, c. 731, §§64-67 (AMD). PL 1975, c. 770, §160 (AMD). PL 1977, c. 212, §§5,6 (AMD). PL 1977, c. 694, §§521-524 (AMD). PL 1979, c. 663, §§177-182 (AMD). PL 1981, c. 253, §3 (AMD). PL 1981, c. 689, §2 (RPR). PL 1981, c. 698, §133 (AMD). PL 1983, c. 334, §§1,2 (AMD). PL 1983, c. 455, §§28,29 (AMD). PL 1983, c. 480, §A33 (AMD). PL 1985, c. 506, §A57 (AMD). PL 1985, c. 520, §3 (AMD). PL 1985, c. 523, §2 (AMD). PL 1987, c. 141, §B28 (AMD). PL 1987, c. 791, §§26-28 (AMD). PL 1989, c. 514, §§20,25 (AMD). PL 1989, c. 866, §§B17-19,26 (AMD). PL 1991, c. 293, §3 (AMD). PL 1991, c. 733, §8 (AMD). PL 1991, c. 793, §9 (AMD). PL 1991, c. 793, §13 (AFF). PL 1993, c. 658, §§22-24 (AMD). PL 1993, c. 683, §A1 (RP). PL 1993, c. 683, §B5 (AFF).

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 7 cases, 1976–2001 · leading case: Opinion of the Justices of the Supreme Jud. Court, 355 A.2d 341 (Me. 1976).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Opinion of the Justices of the Supreme Jud. Court, 355 A.2d 341 (Me. 1976). · cites it 4× “29 MRSA § 2241, sub-§ 1, ¶¶ A and B, as enacted by PL 1971, c.”

State v. Anton, 463 A.2d 703 (Me. 1983). · cites it 2× “Defendant points to 29 M.R.S.A. § 2241(1)(C) (Supp.1982) as showing the collateral consequences of an adjudication that he has violated section 1251.”

Davis v. Sec'y of State, Div. of Motor Vehs., 577 A.2d 338 (Me. 1990). · cites it 2× “) affirming the decision of the Secretary of State, Division of Motor Vehicles (the “Secretary”), suspending Davis’s driver’s license pursuant to 29 M.R.S.A. § 2241(1)(D) (Pamph.1988). 1 The Secretary *339 found Davis suffered from an “adverse medical condition” and suspended…”

Brennan v. Johnson, 391 A.2d 337 (Me. 1978). “§ 891) and that he had been twice convicted in 1976 of operating a motor vehicle after suspension of his operator’s license (29 M.R.S.A. § 2241). At the hearing below 1 the Appellant did not challenge the facts of these three convictions but proposed instead to offer evidence in…”

State v. Morin, 598 A.2d 170 (Me. 1991). · cites it 2× “” He contends that 29 M.R.S.A. § 2241(4) differentiates between persons who had applied for or received a Maine *173 operator’s license, and those who had not, so that notice to the former should be sent to the “last address provided by” the license holder.”

State v. Maloney, 785 A.2d 699 (Me. 2001). · cites it 2× “§ 2482, 3 or former 29 M.R.S.A. § 2241(4), 4 but not notices of revocation sent pursuant to former 29 M.”

Robitaille v. State, 468 A.2d 311 (Me. 1983). “Under 29 M.R.S.A. § 2241(3) (Supp.1981), a person is entitled to a hearing on a license suspension resulting from a preliminary determination of habitual offender status pursuant to 29 M.”

— Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 29, § 2241(1)(C) — 1 case

State v. Anton, 463 A.2d 703 (Me. 1983). “Defendant points to 29 M.R.S.A. § 2241(1)(C) (Supp.1982) as showing the collateral consequences of an adjudication that he has violated section 1251.”

— Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 29, § 2241(1)(D) — 1 case

Davis v. Sec'y of State, Div. of Motor Vehs., 577 A.2d 338 (Me. 1990). “) affirming the decision of the Secretary of State, Division of Motor Vehicles (the “Secretary”), suspending Davis’s driver’s license pursuant to 29 M.R.S.A. § 2241(1)(D) (Pamph.1988). 1 The Secretary *339 found Davis suffered from an “adverse medical condition” and suspended…”

— Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 29, § 2241(2) — 1 case

State v. Anton, 463 A.2d 703 (Me. 1983). “Defendant points to 29 M.R.S.A. § 2241(1)(C) (Supp.1982) as showing the collateral consequences of an adjudication that he has violated section 1251.”

— Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 29, § 2241(3) — 1 case

Robitaille v. State, 468 A.2d 311 (Me. 1983). “Under 29 M.R.S.A. § 2241(3) (Supp.1981), a person is entitled to a hearing on a license suspension resulting from a preliminary determination of habitual offender status pursuant to 29 M.”

— Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 29, § 2241(4) — 2 cases

State v. Morin, 598 A.2d 170 (Me. 1991). “” He contends that 29 M.R.S.A. § 2241(4) differentiates between persons who had applied for or received a Maine *173 operator’s license, and those who had not, so that notice to the former should be sent to the “last address provided by” the license holder.”

State v. Maloney, 785 A.2d 699 (Me. 2001). “§ 2482, 3 or former 29 M.R.S.A. § 2241(4), 4 but not notices of revocation sent pursuant to former 29 M.”

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.