Lisa-Marie Seger v. Karla Nason, 138 A.3d 1221

On April 9, 2015, Lisa-Marie Seger filed a protection-from-abuse complaint on behalf of her child against a neighbor’s child (defendant’s child); Seger did not request any firearm or weapon prohibition.
A temporary protection order issued that did not restrict firearms or dangerous weapons.
At the final hearing Seger was the sole witness and testified about events relayed to her by her children; the court overruled a hearsay objection and admitted those statements as excited utterances under M.R. Evid. 803(2).
The district court made findings supporting entry of a protection-from-abuse order; after reconsideration the court also added a finding that the defendant’s child constituted a “credible threat” to the plaintiff’s child and issued an amended order that nevertheless did not prohibit firearm possession.
Defendant Karla Nason appealed, arguing (inter alia) that admission of the hearsay testimony was erroneous and that evidence was insufficient to support the “credible threat” finding.
The Maine Supreme Judicial Court affirmed the protection order but concluded the “credible threat” finding was erroneous because no firearm-related risk was established and no firearm prohibition was ordered; the case was remanded to remove that finding.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (Seger)	Defendant's Argument (Nason)	Held
Admissibility of hearsay (excited utterance)	Children’s statements relayed to Seger were excited utterances, thus admissible	Hearsay; inadmissible testimony	Court did not err in admitting as excited utterances
Sufficiency of evidence for protection order	Evidence (as admitted) supported that plaintiff’s child needed protection	Evidence insufficient to show abuse	Protection-from-abuse order affirmed
Sufficiency for "credible threat" finding related to firearms	Finding appropriate to indicate risk and support potential firearms restriction	No evidence of firearm risk; finding unsupported	Finding was erroneous because no firearm-specific risk shown
Remedy / Relief	Maintain amended order	Remove the erroneous credible threat finding	Remand with instruction to issue second amended order omitting credible threat finding

Walton v. Ireland, 104 A.3d 883 (Me. 2014) (standard of review for factual findings and sufficiency review in protection order cases)
L’Heureux v. Michaud, 938 A.2d 801 (Me. 2007) (credible-threat finding tied to firearms prohibition and cannot alone support issuance of an order)
Smith v. Hawthorne, 804 A.2d 1133 (Me. 2002) (standards for evidentiary sufficiency in protection-from-abuse proceedings)