There shall be one form of action to be known as “civil action.”
Rule 2.One Form of Action
Adopted December 1, 1959 · Last verified July 8, 2026
In one sentenceRule 2 abolishes Maine's old separate forms of action at law and in equity and declares that every civil claim now proceeds as a single, unified “civil action.”
Full Text of Rule 2
Advisory Committee’s Notes & Reporter’s Notes
Reporter's Notes — December 1, 1959
This rule is the same as Federal Rule 2. It abolishes the common law forms of action and effects a procedural merger of law and equity. The abolition of the forms of action has long since been achieved in all but a few states, and the merger of law and equity has similarly been a common reform. The right to a specific kind of legal or equitable relief upon proof of certain facts is not changed.
The enabling act specifically authorized the merger of law and equity so as to secure one form of action. The effecting of such merger was complicated by the fact that at law the jurisdiction of the Superior Court is exclusive of that of the Supreme Judicial Court, while in equity the jurisdiction of the two courts is concurrent. Plainly law and equity could not be merged so long as these differences in original jurisdiction existed. Accordingly R.S.1954, Chap. 106, Sec. 5, [now 4 M.R.S.A. § 105] and Chap. 107, Sec. 4, [now 14 M.R.S.A. § 6051] have been amended so as to give exclusive original jurisdiction to the Superior Court of all cases whether legal or equitable in their nature, except those brought by extraordinary writ. See R.S.1954, Chap. 107, Sec. 1 [now 14 M.R.S.A. § 5301]. It is provided, however, that a single justice of the Supreme Judicial Court shall have full jurisdiction and power to hear, with his consent, any case in the Superior Court where trial is without jury. Public Laws of 1959, c. 317, § 74 [now 4 M.R.S.A. § 105].
The practical effect is to continue the desirable existing practice of having single justices of the Supreme Judicial Court hear equity cases. The phrasing in terms of trial without jury instead of trial of equity cases is simply to preserve the principle of merging law and equity. There is no thought that justices of the Supreme Judicial Court will sit in ordinary jury-waived cases of a legal nature. The amended statute requires the consent of the Supreme Judicial Court justice to hear such a case; and it may be assumed that such consent will not be forthcoming unless the case is equitable in nature. Statutes providing for actions at law or suits in equity or specifying a named common law form of action are to be treated as referring to the civil action prescribed by these rules. This is spelled out in Rule 81(a).
PLEADINGS, MOTIONS AND ORDERS
Plain-English Summary
Before this rule, a person suing over a wrong had to fit the claim into the right historical box — certain wrongs were pursued as actions at law before a jury, others only as suits in equity before a judge, and each track carried its own procedure and, in Maine’s case, sometimes a different court’s jurisdiction. Rule 2 collapses that structure. It declares one form of action, the civil action, for everything.
The rule does not change what relief a party can win or what a claim requires to succeed; it changes only the vehicle for bringing it. A single civil action can now seek damages, an injunction, or both, without separate proceedings. Maine accomplished the practical side of this merger by giving the Superior Court exclusive original jurisdiction over both legal and equitable claims, so the same court and the same lawsuit can handle whatever relief the case calls for.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is a “civil action” under Rule 2?
It is the single, unified lawsuit format Rule 2 establishes for every civil claim, replacing the older separate actions at law and suits in equity.
Can one lawsuit seek both money damages and an injunction?
Yes. Because Rule 2 merges law and equity into one civil action, a party can pursue legal and equitable relief together in the same case.
Does Rule 2 change what a party has to prove to win a claim?
No. It changes only the procedural form the lawsuit takes, not the substantive law or the elements of any claim.
Source & verification. The rule text and Advisory Committee’s Notes / Reporter’s
Notes are reproduced verbatim from the official Maine Rules of Civil Procedure (Me. R. Civ. P. 2), prescribed by the
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine (4 M.R.S. § 8, the Rules Enabling Act). The plain-English summary is original and written by us. Last verified July 8, 2026. ·
Official source
Also known as: one form of actioncivil action definedmerger of law and equitywhat is a civil action in Maine