Me. Rev. Stat. » Title 5
Maine Revised Statutes

Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 5, § 4551 (2026)

Title

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ME-LEGlegislature.maine.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
This Act may be known and cited as the Maine Human Rights Act.   [PL 1971, c. 501, §1 (NEW).]
SECTION HISTORY
PL 1971, c. 501, §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 98 cases (5 in the last 5 years), 1978–2026 · leading case: Gavrilovic v. Worldwide Language Resources, Inc., 441 F. Supp. 2d 163 (D. Me. 2006).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Gavrilovic v. Worldwide Language Resources, Inc., 441 F. Supp. 2d 163 (D. Me. 2006). · cites it 2× “State Law There is no material differencé between federal and state law on the sexual harassment and retaliation claims (I-V).”
Maine Human Rights Comm'n v. Local 1361, United Paperworkers Int'l Union AFL-CIO, 383 A.2d 369 (Me. 1978). · cites it 2× “Our Maine Legislature has enacted the Maine Human Rights Act, (Maine Act) 5 M.R.S.A. §§ 4551 et seq. The declared purpose of such legislation is to keep continually in review all practices infringing on the basic human right to a life with dignity, and the causes of such…”
Andre Grenier v. Cyanamid Plastics, Inc., 70 F.3d 667 (1st Cir. 1995). “Proceedings Below Grenier filed a two-count complaint in the District of Maine on June 23, 1994, claiming that Cyro violated the ADA and the Maine Human Rights Act, 5 M.R.S.A. § 4551 et seq. 1 Cyro filed a motion for summary judgment on the issue of pre-offer inquiries, and…”
Nicole Dussault v. RRE Coach Lantern Holdings, LLC, 2014 ME 8 (Me. 2014). “[¶ 38] I agree with the Court’s conclusion that the Maine Human Rights Act (MHRA), 5 M.R.S. §§ 4551^634 (2007), does not make participation in the Section 8 housing assistance program mandatory, *65 and that the MHRA prohibits landlords from intentionally discriminating against…”
Charette v. St. John Valley Soil & Water Conservation Dist., 332 F. Supp. 3d 316 (D. Me. 2018). “27 ): Maine Human Rights Act ("MHRA"), 5 M.R.S.A. §§ 4551 - 4634, against the District (Count I); Rehabilitation Act of 1973 ("Rehabilitation Act"), 29 U.”
Pouliot v. Town of Fairfield, 184 F. Supp. 2d 38 (D. Me. 2002). · cites it 2× “(Counts IV and V); and the Maine Human Rights Act, 5 M.R.S.A. § 4551 et seq. (Counts VI and VII).”
Arnold v. United Parcel Serv., Inc., 136 F.3d 854 (1st Cir. 1998). “, and the Maine Human Rights Act, 5 M.R.S.A. § 4551 et seq. On March 14, 1997, after discovery had been completed, UPS filed a motion for summary judgment.”
Morrison v. Carleton Woolen Mills, Inc., 108 F.3d 429 (1st Cir. 1997). “In Count I of her amended complaint, Morrison alleged that she was subjected by Carleton and the other defendants to sexual harassment, in violation of the Maine Human Rights Act, 5 M.R.SA § 4551, and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.”
Gough v. E. Maine Dev. Corp., 172 F. Supp. 2d 221 (D. Me. 2001). · cites it 2× “In Count I of the Complaint, Gough claims that both Defendants violated her rights under the Maine Human Rights Act, 5 M.R.S.A. § 4551 et seq. Counts II and III allege that EMDC violated her rights under the Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.”
Astrowsky v. First Portland Mortg. Corp., Inc., 887 F. Supp. 332 (D. Me. 1995). · cites it 2× “(Count I), the Maine Human Rights Act, 5 M.R.S.A. §§ 4551 et seq. (age based) (Count II); Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.”
Gove v. Career Sys. Dev. Corp., 824 F. Supp. 2d 205 (D. Me. 2011). · cites it 2× “Plaintiff Ann Gove filed this action alleging that she was not hired for a job with Defendant Career Systems Development Corporation (“CSD”) because she was pregnant, in violation of the Maine Human Rights Act, 5 M.R.S.A. § 4551 et seq. and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, 42…”
Percy v. Allen, 449 A.2d 337 (Me. 1982). “We have recently held, however, that the Maine Human Rights Act, 5 M.R.S.A. §§ 4551 — 4632 was enacted against the background of federal anti-discrimination statutes and a network of federal eases examining and applying those laws.”
Show all 98 citing cases →
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.