Maine Revised Statutes

Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 39-A, § 302 (2026)

Sufficiency of notice; knowledge of employer; extension of time for notice

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ME-LEGlegislature.maine.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
A notice given under section 301 may not be held invalid or insufficient by reason of any inaccuracy in stating any of the facts required for proper notice, unless it is shown that it was the intention to mislead and that the employer was in fact misled by the notice. Want of notice is not a bar to proceedings under this Act if it is shown that the employer or the employer's agent had knowledge of the injury. Any time during which the employee is unable by reason of physical or mental incapacity to give the notice, or fails to do so on account of mistake of fact, may not be included in the computation of proper notice. In case of the death of the employee within that period, there is allowed for giving the notice 3 months after the death.   [PL 2011, c. 647, §17 (AMD).]
SECTION HISTORY
PL 1991, c. 885, §A8 (NEW). PL 1991, c. 885, §§A9-11 (AFF). PL 2011, c. 647, §17 (AMD).
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 2006–2024 · leading case: Jensen v. S.D. Warren Co., 2009 ME 35 (Me. 2009).
Jensen v. S.D. Warren Co., 2009 ME 35 (Me. 2009). · cites it 3× “Relying on 39-A M.R.S. § 302 (2008), he concluded that the gradual injury was not barred by the two-year statute of limitations or the ninety-day notice provision because Jensen was operating under a mistake of fact as to the cause and nature of the injury until June 2006, when…”
Steve L. Michaud v. Caribou Ford-Mercury, Inc., 2024 ME 74 (Me. 2024). “2d 528 ; see also 39-A M.R.S. § 302 (2024) (“Want of notice is not a bar to proceedings under this Act if it is shown that the employer .”
Pearson v. Freeport Sch. Dep't, 900 A.2d 728 (Me. 2006). · cites it 2× ““[K]nowledge of the injury” pursuant to 39-A M.R.S. § 302 (2005) 6 differs from “notice or knowledge of a claim for incapacity .”
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.