Guardianship of Luneau, 147 A.3d 349

Marviline Luneau, age 91, suffered serious medical problems and was living in a nursing home by 2015; she had been cared for at home by Mark Langlais until hospitalization raised concerns.
Langlais (younger by 29 years) lived with Luneau from 2006–2015; the court found evidence of poor living conditions, Langlais’s alcoholism, PTSD, chronic insomnia, and refusal to take prescribed meds.
Medical records from 2015 noted failure-to-thrive and possible neglect or abuse by Luneau’s significant other; physicians concluded she was unable to care for herself.
The Department of Health and Human Services petitioned for appointment of a public guardian after allegations of inappropriate and unwanted physical contact by Langlais in the nursing home.
After an ex parte temporary appointment and a visitor’s report recommending guardianship, the court held a four-day hearing; the court found Luneau incapacitated and appointed the Department as permanent guardian.
Langlais appealed, challenging procedures, the standard of proof, and whether the guardianship order promoted maximum self-reliance; the appellate court affirmed.

Issue	Langlais’s Argument	Department’s Argument	Held
Validity of temporary guardianship appointment	Procedural errors in appointing temporary public guardian	Temporary issue moot once permanent guardian appointed	Moot — temporary guardianship expired upon permanent appointment
Standard of proof for permanent guardianship	Court failed to apply clear-and-convincing standard	Court applied correct statutory standard and made required findings	Court applied correct standard; findings sufficient
Adequacy of hearing on permanent guardianship	Court did not conduct a full hearing on the merits	Four-day hearing with concessions and findings satisfied §5-304(b)	Hearing adequate; required findings made
Requirement to encourage maximum self-reliance	Court failed to promote maximum self-reliance by refusing Langlais as guardian	Court properly found Langlais unsuitable based on evidence and could decline to appoint him	Court affirmed refusal; appointment of Department appropriate

Greaton v. Greaton, 36 A.3d 913 (Me. 2012) (in appeals without transcript, appellate court will assume record supports trial court findings)
Rainbow v. Ransom, 990 A.2d 535 (Me. 2010) (same principle regarding absent transcript)
In re Guardianship of Young, 95 A.3d 607 (Me. 2014) (appeal from expired temporary guardianship is moot)