(a) Capacity. It is not necessary to aver the capacity of a party to sue or be sued or the authority of a party to sue or be sued in a representative capacity or the legal existence of an organized association of persons that is made a party. When a party desires to raise an issue as to the legal existence of any party or the capacity of any party to sue or be sued or the authority of a party to sue or be sued in a representative capacity, the party desiring to raise the issue shall do so by specific negative averment, which shall include such supporting particulars as are peculiarly within the pleader’s knowledge.
Rule 9.Pleading Special Matters
Adopted December 1, 1959 · Last verified July 8, 2026
In one sentenceRule 9 relaxes ordinary pleading requirements for a handful of specific situations — a party's capacity or authority to sue, official documents and judgments, and time and place — while tightening the requirement for fraud or mistake, which must be pleaded with particularity.
Full Text of Rule 9
(b) Fraud, Mistake, Condition of the Mind. In all averments of fraud or mistake, the circumstances constituting fraud or mistake shall be stated with particularity. Malice, intent, knowledge, and other condition of mind of a person may be averred generally.
(c) Conditions Precedent. In pleading the performance or occurrence of conditions precedent, it is sufficient to aver generally that all conditions precedent have been performed or have occurred. A denial of performance or occurrence shall be made specifically and with particularity, but when so made the party pleading the performance or occurrence has the burden of establishing it.
(d) Official Document or Act. In pleading an official document or official act it is sufficient to aver that the document was issued or the act done in compliance with law.
(e) Judgment. In pleading a judgment or decision of a domestic or foreign court, judicial or quasi-judicial tribunal, or of a board or officer, it is sufficient to aver the judgment or decision without setting forth matter showing jurisdiction to render it.
(f) Time and Place. For the purpose of testing the sufficiency of a pleading, averments of time and place are material and shall be considered like all other averments of material matter.
(g) Special Damage. When items of special damage are claimed they shall be specifically stated.
Advisory Committee’s Notes & Reporter’s Notes
Reporter's Notes — December 1, 1959
This rule is substantially the same as Federal Rule 9 and does not significantly change Maine law. Capacity to sue need not now be alleged by the plaintiff, Leonard Advertising Co. v. Flagg, 128 Me. 433, 148 A. 561 (1930), and averments of fraud must be stated with particularity. Semo v. Goudreau, 147 Me. 17, 83 A.2d 209 (1951). Subdivision (c) seems declaratory of existing practice under R.S.1954, Chap. 113, Sec. 28 (repealed in 1959). Subdivision (f) is chiefly important for making the averment of time material in determining the applicability of the statute of limitations, contrary to the common law rule. Subdivision (g) preserves the present requirement of alleging items of special damage. See Fournier v. Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co., 128 Me. 393, 148 A. 147 (1929).
Plain-English Summary
Most of Rule 9 makes pleading easier. A party does not need to plead its own capacity to sue or be sued, or the authority of a representative party, or the legal existence of an association that is a party — those are presumed unless someone specifically and factually denies them. Similarly, a party pleading an official document or act need only aver that it was issued or done in compliance with law, and a party pleading a judgment need only aver the judgment or decision itself, without showing the court’s jurisdiction to have rendered it.
Fraud and mistake work the opposite way. Subdivision (b) requires the circumstances constituting fraud or mistake to be stated with particularity — general allegations are not enough — though a person’s state of mind, such as malice or intent, may still be averred generally. Subdivision (g) adds a similar specificity requirement for special damages, which must be specifically stated rather than left to inference.
Frequently Asked Questions
Does a plaintiff need to plead that it has the capacity to sue?
No. Capacity to sue or be sued, and the authority of a party suing in a representative capacity, need not be pleaded; a party challenging capacity must raise it by specific negative averment with supporting particulars.
How specifically must fraud be pleaded?
With particularity — the circumstances constituting the fraud or mistake must be stated specifically, not alleged in general terms, though the person’s state of mind may still be averred generally.
Do special damages need to be itemized in the pleading?
Yes. Rule 9(g) requires items of special damage to be specifically stated.
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. 9), 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: pleading fraud with particularitypleading mistakecapacity to suepleading special damagespleading a judgment