Lack of privity between plaintiff and defendant shall be no defense in any action brought against the manufacturer, seller or supplier of goods for breach of warranty, express or implied, although the plaintiff did not purchase the goods from the defendant, if the plaintiff was a person whom the manufacturer, seller or supplier might reasonably have expected to use, consume or be affected by the goods.
Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 11, § 2-318
When lack of privity no defense in action against manufacturer, seller or supplier of goods
Known as the Uniform Commercial Code
The act spans §§ 2–9 (548 sections).
Applied in 5 court decisions — leading case Koken v. Black & Veatch Construction, Inc. (2005)
Most recently applied in Koken v. Black & Veatch Construction, Inc. (October 2005)
PL 1969, c. 327, §1 (RPR)
How often courts cite this section
Court decisions citing this, by year. The dip in the last several years is a data-coverage gap, not a real trend — our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so recent citations are undercounted.
Official source: Maine Legislature. Reproduced from public-domain Maine statutes; confirm against the official source for the current text. Not legal advice.