Maine’s top court rejects eviction appeal by midcoast farmers

Maine Supreme Court Rejects Farmers’ Appeal, Orders Two Coves Farm Eviction

Harpswell, Maine – Aug. 19 2026 – The Maine Supreme Judicial Court (SJC) dismissed the last appeal filed by Joseph and Laura Grady, who had operated Two Coves Farm on Harpswell’s Neck for more than 16 years. The court upheld an earlier arbitrator’s decision that the couple failed to pay approximately $124,000 in rent and did not plant crops as required by their lease. The ruling obliges the Gradys to vacate the 100‑acre property and hand over the livestock they had relocated from the farm.

A Farm Built on a Long‑Standing Partnership

In 2006, 94‑year‑old Helen Norton and her late husband, Walter, purchased a 100‑acre saltwater farm on Harpswell Neck. They created Neils Point LLC and, in 2008, granted an agricultural conservation easement to the Maine Farmland Trust, with the Harpswell Heritage Land Trust overseeing the easement. The easement was meant to protect the land from suburban sprawl and ensure it remained usable for “traditional agricultural purposes.”

In 2009 the Gradys signed a stewardship agreement with Neils Point LLC. The contract allowed them to live and farm on the land while agreeing to keep it in productive operation and to pay rent equal to 10 % of their “annual net proceeds” – revenue minus legitimate operating expenses. The lease was renewed in 2017 for an additional 25 years.

For years, Two Coves Farm was a familiar sight for drivers on Harpswell Neck Road. The farm stand sold eggs, lamb, tomatoes, cucumbers, yarn and sheepskins, and the farm’s fields were visible from the road.

The Arbitration and First Court Decisions

Relations deteriorated in 2025 when Norton alleged that the Gradys had not paid rent on time, had understated their revenue, and had treated household and personal expenses as business costs. On July 17, 2025 an arbitrator, Portland attorney Timothy J. Bryant, reviewed the evidence and found the Gradys had made no rent payments in 2023 and 2024. The arbitrator also concluded that the couple had not actively cultivated crops as required by the 2017 lease.

In an October 24, 2025 decision, the arbitrator ordered the Gradys to pay Neils Point LLC $124,175 and to vacate the farm by December 31, 2025. The Gradys did not leave. On December 30, 2025 they filed an appeal with the Maine Superior Court, arguing that because the property also served as their home, state law protected them from eviction without the formal residential‑tenant process.

On February 4, 2026 Superior Court Justice Darcie N. McElwee ruled in favor of Norton, confirming that the arbitrator’s decision was valid and that the Gradys must vacate. The Gradys, with attorneys Regan A. Sweeney and J. Spencer Hoffman, appealed to the SJC.

Supreme Judicial Court Decision

The SJC’s August 19 ruling rejected the Gradys’ appeal. The court reaffirmed the arbitrator’s decision, rejecting the claim that the lease should be treated as a residential tenancy. The court held that the lease was a commercial contract, and the Gradys had voluntarily agreed to arbitration as the dispute‑resolution mechanism.

In a brief statement sent to the press, the Gradys said, “The last two years of defending ourselves from the claims made against us have been exhausting; losing our home where we planned to spend the rest of our lives, as well as the business we built from scratch, was devastating and is still fresh for us.” The couple also announced that they had relocated their livestock and were moving to a new home, while expressing determination to resume farming in the future.

Norton, who has been involved in conserving open land across Harpswell and neighboring communities, expressed relief. “It has cost me a lot of money, it has cost me a lot of time and effort, and it has made us quite unhappy,” she said. “I am pleased by the ruling and am working to make repairs to the property that will allow me to find a good, responsible farmer and his family and make it a viable working farm as soon as next spring.”

Legal Arguments and Implications

The legal dispute hinged on whether the Gradys were a commercial tenant or a resident farmer. Norton’s lawyers argued that the Gradys had taken advantage of an ailing 94‑year‑old woman, had “squatted” on the land, and had delayed the eviction process with a series of “11th‑hour arguments.” They also noted that the Gradys had never grown any crops during the 2017 lease period and that the property was under “false pretenses” for a decade.

The Gradys’ counsel framed the case as a “stark injustice,” claiming that a wealthy landowner had used commercial arbitration to dispossess a farming family that had called the farm home for 16 years. They emphasized that farmers are “the backbone of Maine’s communities” and that their case could set a precedent for how agricultural tenancy disputes are handled. Their legal team also highlighted that the Gradys had been served a “writ of possession” on February 25, giving them 48 hours to vacate, and argued that they were denied meaningful appellate relief before eviction proceedings began.

The SJC’s ruling, by upholding the arbitration order and treating the lease as purely commercial, leaves the legal path clear for the Gradys. The decision also underscores the limited recourse for farmers who rely on land as both a home and a place of work, a point that the farmers’ advocates warned could affect future disputes.

Moving Forward

Norton will continue to maintain the farm’s infrastructure to attract a new farmer. She said the goal is to have a “good, responsible farmer and his family” operate the land by next spring. The Gradys, meanwhile, have moved to a new home. In a statement emailed to the local paper, they thanked neighbors for their support and said, “We do not know what the future holds at the moment, but we will certainly be finding our way back to farming in the months and years ahead.”

The case remains a reminder of the delicate balance between property rights, agricultural stewardship, and tenant protections in Maine. While the legal process concluded on Harpswell’s shores, the broader conversation about how the state treats farming families in lease agreements continues.