Pat Doe v. Mark Forino

Summary

The Maine Supreme Judicial Court affirmed a protection-from-abuse order entered in favor of two children against Mark Forino. The court held that claim preclusion did not bar the second protection-from-abuse complaint because the children were excluded from the first final order and were not in privity with the parties to that proceeding. The court also declined to address an inadequately developed issue-preclusion argument and emphasized caution in applying res judicata in cases involving children.

Holdings

1. Claim preclusion did not bar the second complaint because the two younger children were not parties to the first final judgment and were not in privity with Doe or the oldest child.
2. The court did not reach the issue-preclusion argument because it was functionally duplicative of the claim-preclusion argument and was inadequately developed for appellate review.

Questions Presented

1. Whether claim preclusion barred Doe's second protection-from-abuse complaint because it involved the same alleged incident as the first complaint.
2. Whether the two younger children were parties to, or in privity with parties to, the first action such that claim preclusion applied.
3. Whether Forino's inadequately developed issue-preclusion argument required exclusion of evidence concerning allegations in the first complaint.

Disposition

affirmed