Maine Revised Statutes

Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 4, § 105 (2026)

Superior Court; civil jurisdiction

✓ current as of May 2026

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

1. Jurisdiction. Except as provided in subsection 2, the Superior Court has and shall exercise exclusive jurisdiction and has and shall exercise all of the powers, duties and authority necessary for exercising the jurisdiction in any and all matters that were, prior to January 1, 1930, within the jurisdiction of the Supreme Judicial Court or any of the Superior Courts, whether cognizable at law or in equity.

[PL 1999, c. 731, Pt. ZZZ, §3 (NEW); PL 1999, c. 731, Pt. ZZZ, §42 (AFF).]

2. Exceptions to Superior Court's exclusive jurisdiction. The Superior Court does not have exclusive jurisdiction over matters for which:

A. Concurrent or exclusive jurisdiction is vested in the District Court; or [PL 1999, c. 731, Pt. ZZZ, §3 (NEW); PL 1999, c. 731, Pt. ZZZ, §42 (AFF).]

B. Concurrent jurisdiction is vested in the Supreme Judicial Court as provided in Title 14, section 5301. [PL 1999, c. 731, Pt. ZZZ, §3 (NEW); PL 1999, c. 731, Pt. ZZZ, §42 (AFF).]

[PL 1999, c. 731, Pt. ZZZ, §3 (NEW); PL 1999, c. 731, Pt. ZZZ, §42 (AFF).]

3. Appellate jurisdiction. The Superior Court shall hear appeals as follows:

A. Administrative appeals brought pursuant to Title 5, chapter 375, subchapter 7 and the Maine Rules of Civil Procedure, Rules 80B and 80C; and [PL 2005, c. 48, §1 (AMD).]

B. Appeals from the District Court:

(1) Brought pursuant to Title 14, section 6008;

(2) Brought pursuant to Title 14, chapter 738;

(3) As provided in Title 15, section 1; and

(4) Brought pursuant to Title 34‑B, section 3864, subsection 11. [PL 2005, c. 48, §1 (AMD).]

[PL 2005, c. 48, §1 (AMD).]

4. No jurisdiction, powers, duties or authority of the Law Court. The Superior Court does not have and may not exercise the jurisdiction, powers, duties and authority of the Supreme Judicial Court sitting as the Law Court.

[PL 1999, c. 731, Pt. ZZZ, §3 (NEW); PL 1999, c. 731, Pt. ZZZ, §42 (AFF).]

SECTION HISTORY

PL 1975, c. 430, §1 (AMD). PL 1979, c. 540, §3 (AMD). PL 1999, c. 731, §ZZZ3 (RPR). PL 1999, c. 731, §ZZZ42 (AFF). PL 2005, c. 48, §1 (AMD).

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 42 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1967–2023 · leading case: Norris Fam. Assocs., LLC v. Town of Phippsburg, 879 A.2d 1007 (Me. 2005).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Norris Fam. Assocs., LLC v. Town of Phippsburg, 879 A.2d 1007 (Me. 2005). · cites it 2× “Title 4 M.R.S.A. § 105(3) has been recently amended.”

Manon Cote v. Roger Vallee, 2019 ME 156 (Me. 2019). · cites it 3× “2 The Vallees indicated that the District Court hearing had not been recorded.”

Windham Land Trust v. Jeffords, 2009 ME 29 (Me. 2009). “See 4 M.R.S. § 105 (2008); 14 M.R.S. § 6051 (2008).”

City of Biddeford v. Holland, 886 A.2d 1281 (Me. 2005). · cites it 3× “Holland also argues that only after a decision of the District Court may the Superior Court conduct a jury trial — a jury trial de novo — pursuant to either its general jurisdictional grant contained in 4 M.R.S.A. § 105 (Supp.2004), or out of necessity to avail him of his…”

Est. of Hoch v. Stifel, 2011 ME 24 (Me. 2011). “See 4 M.R.S. § 105 (2010); 14 M.R.S. § 6051 (2010); Cassidy v.”

Taylor v. Walker, 173 A.3d 539 (Me. 2017). “See 4 M.R.S. § 105(3)(B)(2) (2016); 14 M.R.S.”

Inhabitants of Town of Boothbay, Etc. v. Russell, 410 A.2d 554 (Me. 1980). “, purports neither to confer exclusive jurisdiction of civil violations on the District Court nor to divest the Superior Court of such jurisdiction, which it continued to exercise by virtue of its general grant of jurisdiction in civil actions, 4 M.R.S.A. § 105 (1979), even…”

Robert L. Connary v. Richard A. Shea, 2021 ME 44 (Me. 2021). “See 4 M.R.S. §§ 105, 252 (2021); 14 M.R.S. 5956 (2021).”

Durgin v. Robertson, 428 A.2d 65 (Me. 1981). “” 4 M.R.S.A. § 105 (Supp.1980); Sowles v. Beaumier, Me.”

Dissell v. Trans World Airlines, 511 A.2d 441 (Me. 1986). “4 M.R.S.A. § 105 (Supp.1985-1986). If on its facts a case does not fall within the exceptions to Superior Court jurisdiction, the court is said to have subject-matter jurisdiction over the case.”

Globe Air, Inc. v. Thurston, 438 A.2d 884 (Me. 1981). “§§ 11001-11008, was not exercising plenary equity or at law jurisdiction pursuant to 4 M.R.S.A. § 105 (the charter of its general powers).”

Town of Kittery v. James M. Dineen, 2017 ME 53 (Me. 2017). “[¶ 19] Dineen challenges the trial court’s subject matter jurisdiction, arguing that the Mary’s Store property was not subject to the court’s June 19, 2015, order because the Mary’s Store property was not the subject of the complaint initially filed in this case.”

Show all 42 citing cases →

— Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 4, § 105(1) — 5 cases

Est. of Jeanne S. Reed, 2016 ME 90 (Me. 2016).

Montgomery v. State of Maine (Me. Super. Ct 2007).

Dow v. OneWest Bank (Me. Super. Ct 2013).

Nationstar Mortg. v. Halfacre (Me. Super. Ct 2015).

Bank of Am., N.A. v. Mahoney (Me. Super. Ct 2015).

— Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 4, § 105(3) — 4 cases

Norris Fam. Assocs., LLC v. Town of Phippsburg, 879 A.2d 1007 (Me. 2005). “Title 4 M.R.S.A. § 105(3) has been recently amended.”

Greif v. Town of Bar Harbor, 167 A.3d 1272 (Me. 2017).

Greif v. Town of Bar Harbor, 167 A.3d 1272 (Me. 2017).

Greif v. Town of Bar Harbor, 167 A.3d 1272 (Me. 2017).

— Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 4, § 105(3)(8)(1) — 1 case

Rowell, LLC v. 11 Town, LLC (Me. Super. Ct 2017).

— Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 4, § 105(3)(A) — 1 case

Norris Fam. Assocs., LLC v. Town of Phippsburg, 879 A.2d 1007 (Me. 2005). “Title 4 M.R.S.A. § 105(3) has been recently amended.”

— Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 4, § 105(3)(B)(2) — 6 cases

Manon Cote v. Roger Vallee, 2019 ME 156 (Me. 2019). “2 The Vallees indicated that the District Court hearing had not been recorded.”

Taylor v. Walker, 173 A.3d 539 (Me. 2017). “See 4 M.R.S. § 105(3)(B)(2) (2016); 14 M.R.S.”

Taylor v. Walker, 173 A.3d 539 (Me. 2017).

Taylor v. Walker, 173 A.3d 539 (Me. 2017).

Taylor v. Walker, 173 A.3d 539 (Me. 2017).

— Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 4, § 105(3)(B)(4) — 1 case

In re Involuntary Commitment of M., 2020 ME 99 (Me. 2020).

— Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 4, § 105(4) — 1 case

Conservation Law Found. v. Pub. Utils. Comm'n, 192 A.3d 596 (Me. 2018).

— Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 4, § 105(l) — 1 case

Darling's v. Chrysler Grp., LLC, 57 F. Supp. 3d 68 (D. Me. 2014).

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.