O'Brien v. Weber
2012 ME 98
| Me. | 2012Background
- Weber appeals a protection from abuse order in Portland based on 19-A M.R.S. § 4007(2); he challenges authority to issue a new order from an expired, unextended order based on the same act.
- In 2008, a two-year protection from abuse order was issued against Weber after a hearing in which the daughter testified via affidavit about a threatening phone call; Weber did not appear.
- The 2008 order expired in June 2010; no extension motion was filed by O’Brien.
- In October 2011 Weber obtained harassment orders in Wiscasset against O’Brien, while O’Brien separately sought a new PFA against Weber in Portland.
- On November 7, 2011, a hearing resulted in a new two-year PFA for the daughter based solely on the 2008 phone call.
- The trial court’s ruling was that the 2011 PFA was improperly based on the expired order’s act, leading to the vacatur of the judgment.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether a new PFA order can be entered based only on an act from an expired order | Weber: statute requires more than expired-act proof; no new order solely on old act | O’Brien: new order may rely on prior abuse if proven anew | Court vacates judgment; cannot issue new PFA from expired act. |
Key Cases Cited
- Jusseaume v. Ducatt, 2011 ME 43 (Me. 2011) (statutory interpretation of PFA procedures)
- L’Heureux v. Michaud, 2007 ME 149 (Me. 2007) (finding of abuse required to issue PFA)
- Dyer v. Dyer, 2010 ME 105 (Me. 2010) (extension of PFA must occur before or promptly after expiration)