Susan E. (Gerakaris) Robertson v. Andrew N. Gerakaris, 119 A.3d 739

Parties divorced in 2006; Robertson awarded sole parental rights and primary residence of three children by agreement.
Post-divorce relations were highly contentious with repeated motions to modify and motions for contempt; a 2010 order created parallel but not fully shared parental rights and a strict contact schedule.
Gerakaris repeatedly violated the schedule (late returns, unscheduled contacts), negatively affecting the children and leading to school and behavioral problems, particularly for the eldest son.
In May 2013 Gerakaris moved to modify primary residence (seeking custody of the children, mainly the eldest son), alleging changed circumstances including the children’s preferences; Robertson moved for contempt.
Gerakaris filed a motion for recusal one week before trial alleging the judge had prior contacts with Robertson’s extended family and prior rulings favoring Robertson; the judge disclosed tenuous connections and denied recusal.
The court excluded testimony from the two younger children, allowed only the eldest son to testify, denied Gerakaris’s modification request, found Gerakaris in contempt, modified the contact schedule, ordered counseling, and awarded Robertson attorney fees. Judgment affirmed on appeal.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (Gerakaris)	Defendant's Argument (Robertson)	Held
Judicial recusal	Judge had prior professional/business contacts with Robertson’s extended family and prior adverse rulings showing bias; judge should recuse	Judge’s connections were tenuous, disclosed, and insufficient to show bias; prior rulings are not evidence of bias	Denial of recusal affirmed; no abuse of discretion or due process violation
Exclusion of younger children’s testimony	Younger children would clarify credibility disputes and support changed-circumstances claim	Testimony would be emotionally harmful, cumulative, and unnecessary	Exclusion affirmed as within broad trial-court discretion under M.R. Evid. 403
Motion to modify primary residence	Circumstances changed and children preferred to live with Gerakaris, warranting modification	No sufficient change in circumstances; record supported keeping current allocation	Denial of modification affirmed; allocation supported by competent evidence and best-interests analysis
Contempt, contact modification, and attorney fees	Contempt findings and sanctions (reduced contact, fees) were improper	Contempt justified by repeated violations; sanctions and fees appropriate to enforce order and protect children	Contempt findings, contact limitations, counseling order, and attorney-fee award affirmed

State v. Atwood, 988 A.2d 981 (Me. 2010) (standard of review and disclosure obligations for recusal)
Charette v. Charette, 60 A.3d 1264 (Me. 2013) (recusal where impartiality might reasonably be questioned)
Dalton v. Dalton, 99 A.3d 723 (Me. 2014) (prior adverse rulings do not alone demonstrate judicial bias)
Caperton v. A. T. Massey Coal Co., 556 U.S. 868 (U.S. 2009) (constitutional standard for judicial bias and due process)
Nadeau v. Nadeau, 957 A.2d 108 (Me. 2008) (trial court discretion to exclude child testimony under Rule 403)