PREMISES LIABILITY COMPLAINT — MAINE

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. Caption
2. Parties
3. Jurisdiction and Venue
4. Factual Allegations
5. Duty of Care — Visitor Status
6. First Cause of Action — Negligence (Premises Liability)
7. Second Cause of Action — Failure to Warn
8. Third Cause of Action — Negligent Maintenance
9. Damages
10. Jury Demand
11. Prayer for Relief
12. Verification
13. State-Specific Notes
14. Sources and References

1. CAPTION

STATE OF MAINE

[COUNTY NAME], ss.

SUPERIOR COURT

CIVIL ACTION

2. PARTIES

1. Plaintiff [PLAINTIFF FULL NAME] ("Plaintiff") is an individual residing in [CITY/TOWN], [COUNTY] County, Maine.

2. Defendant [DEFENDANT FULL NAME] ("Defendant") is [an individual residing in / a corporation organized under the laws of / a limited liability company formed under the laws of] [STATE], and at all relevant times was the [owner / lessee / occupier / manager] of the real property located at [PROPERTY ADDRESS], [CITY/TOWN], [COUNTY] County, Maine (the "Premises"). Defendant may be served with process at [ADDRESS FOR SERVICE].

3.

3. JURISDICTION AND VENUE

4. This Court has jurisdiction over this matter pursuant to 4 M.R.S. § 105 and 14 M.R.S. § 704.

5. Venue is proper in [COUNTY] County pursuant to 14 M.R.S. § 501 because [the cause of action arose in this county / Defendant resides in this county].

4. FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS

6. At all relevant times, Defendant [owned / leased / occupied / managed / controlled] the Premises located at [PROPERTY ADDRESS], [CITY/TOWN], Maine [ZIP CODE].

7. On or about [DATE OF INCIDENT], Plaintiff was [lawfully present on / entering / exiting] the Premises for the purpose of [PURPOSE OF VISIT].

8. At the time of the incident, there existed on the Premises a dangerous condition, specifically: [DESCRIBE DANGEROUS CONDITION IN DETAIL].

9. Defendant had [actual / constructive] knowledge of the dangerous condition because:

☐ Defendant created the dangerous condition.

☐ Defendant had actual knowledge of the condition through [DESCRIBE].

☐ The condition existed for a sufficient period of time that Defendant, in the exercise of reasonable care, should have discovered it.

☐ The condition was part of a recurring hazard known to Defendant.

10. As a direct result of the dangerous condition, Plaintiff [DESCRIBE INCIDENT] and sustained serious injuries.

5. DUTY OF CARE — VISITOR STATUS

11. At the time of the incident, Plaintiff was [an invitee / a licensee] on the Premises.

If Invitee:

12. Plaintiff entered the Premises at the express or implied invitation of Defendant for a purpose connected with the business conducted on the Premises. As the owner/occupier, Defendant owed Plaintiff a duty to use reasonable care to keep the Premises in a reasonably safe condition, to warn of dangerous conditions, and to take reasonable precautions to protect Plaintiff against foreseeable dangers. Shannon v. Dow, 131 Me. 28 (1934).

If Licensee:

12. Plaintiff entered the Premises with the consent of Defendant but not for a business purpose. Defendant owed Plaintiff a duty to warn of known dangerous conditions that were not open and obvious.

6. FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION — NEGLIGENCE (PREMISES LIABILITY)

(Against [DEFENDANT NAME])

13. Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates by reference paragraphs 1 through 12 above.

14. Defendant owed Plaintiff a duty to exercise reasonable care to maintain the Premises in a reasonably safe condition.

15. Defendant breached this duty by [failing to maintain the Premises / failing to inspect for hazards / failing to repair the dangerous condition / failing to adequately warn Plaintiff].

16. Defendant's breach was a proximate cause of Plaintiff's injuries and damages.

7. SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION — FAILURE TO WARN

(Against [DEFENDANT NAME])

17. Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates by reference all preceding paragraphs.

18. Defendant knew or should have known of the dangerous condition on the Premises.

19. Defendant failed to provide adequate warning to Plaintiff of the dangerous condition, including but not limited to [failure to post warning signs / failure to barricade the area / failure to provide verbal warnings].

20. Defendant's failure to warn was a proximate cause of Plaintiff's injuries.

8. THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION — NEGLIGENT MAINTENANCE

(Against [DEFENDANT NAME])

21. Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates by reference all preceding paragraphs.

22. Defendant had a duty to properly maintain the Premises, including but not limited to [DESCRIBE SPECIFIC MAINTENANCE OBLIGATION — e.g., clearing ice and snow, repairing walkways, maintaining lighting].

23. Defendant negligently failed to perform required maintenance.

24. Defendant's negligent maintenance was a proximate cause of Plaintiff's injuries.

9. DAMAGES

25. As a proximate result of Defendant's negligence, Plaintiff has suffered and continues to suffer the following damages:

a. Medical Expenses: Past and future reasonable and necessary medical expenses.

b. Lost Wages and Earning Capacity: Past and future loss of wages and earning capacity.

c. Physical Pain and Suffering: Past and future physical pain and suffering.

d. Mental Anguish: Past and future mental anguish and emotional distress.

e. Physical Impairment: Past and future physical impairment and disability.

f. Disfigurement: Past and future disfigurement.

g. Loss of Enjoyment of Life: Past and future loss of enjoyment of life.

h. Loss of Consortium: [IF APPLICABLE — Loss of consortium.]

10. JURY DEMAND

26. Plaintiff hereby demands a trial by jury on all issues triable by jury.

11. PRAYER FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands judgment against Defendant as follows:

1. Compensatory damages in an amount to be determined at trial;
2. Pre-judgment and post-judgment interest as allowed by law;
3. Costs of suit;
4. Such other and further relief as the Court deems just and equitable.

Respectfully submitted,

[LAW FIRM NAME]

By: ________________________________________
[ATTORNEY NAME], Maine Bar No. [NUMBER]
[ADDRESS LINE 1]
[ADDRESS LINE 2]
[CITY/TOWN], Maine [ZIP CODE]
Telephone: [PHONE]
Facsimile: [FAX]
Email: [EMAIL]
Attorney for Plaintiff [PLAINTIFF NAME]

12. VERIFICATION

STATE OF MAINE
COUNTY OF [COUNTY NAME]

I, [PLAINTIFF FULL NAME], being duly sworn, state that I have read the foregoing Complaint and that the facts stated therein are true to the best of my knowledge and belief.

________________________________________
[PLAINTIFF FULL NAME]

SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO BEFORE ME on [DATE].

________________________________________
Notary Public / Attorney at Law
My Commission Expires: [DATE]

13. STATE-SPECIFIC NOTES

Duty of Reasonable Care. Maine applies a general duty of reasonable care to all lawful visitors. The visitor's status (invitee, licensee, trespasser) remains relevant to determining what care is reasonable under the circumstances.

Modified Comparative Negligence (50% Bar). Under 14 M.R.S. § 156, a plaintiff is barred from recovery if found equally at fault (50% or more). Damages are reduced by the plaintiff's share of responsibility. The jury reduces damages by dollars and cents, not by percentage.

Six-Year Statute of Limitations. Maine has one of the longest limitation periods — six (6) years from the date of injury. 14 M.R.S. § 752.

Open and Obvious Doctrine. Maine recognizes the "open and obvious" defense but it does not automatically bar recovery. It is one factor in the overall negligence analysis.

Government Claims. Claims against government entities require compliance with the Maine Tort Claims Act (14 M.R.S. § 8101 et seq.), including a 180-day notice requirement and damage caps of $400,000 per occurrence.

Snow and Ice. Maine does not follow the "natural accumulation" rule. Property owners have a duty to exercise reasonable care to remove ice and snow.

14. SOURCES AND REFERENCES

• 14 M.R.S. § 156 — Comparative negligence
• 14 M.R.S. § 752 — Six-year statute of limitations
• 14 M.R.S. § 8101 et seq. — Maine Tort Claims Act
• Shannon v. Dow, 131 Me. 28 (1934)
• Brown v. Delta Tau Delta, 2015 ME 75, 118 A.3d 789
• Rallis v. Demoulas Super Markets, Inc. (cited in Maine premises law analysis)