Rule 102. Purpose

These rules should be construed so as to administer every proceeding fairly, eliminate unjustifiable expense and delay, and promote the development of evidence law, to the end of ascertaining the truth and securing a just determination.

Committee Notes

Maine Restyling Note [November 2014] Maine Rule 102 and Federal Rule 102 are substantively identical, and therefore the Advisory Committee recommends adoption of the language of the restyled Federal Rule.

Federal Advisory Committee Note The language of Rule 102 has been amended as part of the restyling of the Evidence Rules to make them more easily understood and to make style and terminology consistent throughout the rules. These changes are intended to be stylistic only. There is no intent to change any result in any ruling on evidence admissibility.

Advisers' Note to former M.R. Evid. 102 (February 2, 1976) This generalized statement of purpose is comparable to [M.R. Civ. P.] 1 and M.R.Crim.P. 2. It sets the tone of flexibility and liberality in construing the rules to the end that truth may be ascertained. This negates the old-fashioned common-law rule that statutes—or rules—in derogation thereof are to be strictly construed. The rule is a guide as to the principles by which the judge is to exercise his discretion, but not of course a license to disregard the rules to reach a result he believes to be just.