Summary
The Maine Supreme Judicial Court held that discovery is not categorically prohibited in protection from abuse proceedings. Discovery is permitted only on rare occasions when justice requires it and when the requests are not intended to delay, intimidate, harass, or otherwise abuse the opposing party. The court affirmed the trial court’s order allowing limited interrogatory discovery and denying the remainder of the requested discovery.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether an interlocutory order allowing discovery in a protection from abuse proceeding was immediately appealable under the collateral order exception to Maine's final judgment rule.
- Whether discovery is categorically prohibited in protection from abuse proceedings.
- Whether the trial court abused its discretion by allowing Roe to pursue thirteen interrogatories while denying the remaining interrogatories and document requests.
Holdings
- The order allowing discovery was immediately reviewable under the collateral order exception to the final judgment rule because the issue was separable from the merits, presented a major unsettled question of law, and implicated rights that would be irreparably lost without immediate review.
- Discovery is not categorically prohibited in protection from abuse actions, but it is rarely appropriate or necessary and may proceed only within strict parameters.
- A party seeking discovery must first petition the trial court for leave, promptly and timely, and must show that justice requires access to the requested materials and that the request is not intended to delay, intimidate, harass, or otherwise abuse the recipient.
- The trial court did not abuse its discretion by requiring Doe to answer thirteen interrogatories and denying the remaining interrogatories and all document requests.
Key quotations
“Accordingly, we conclude that, based on the language and purpose of the protection from abuse statutes, discovery can be available in a protection from abuse action, but only on rare occasions and if certain conditions are met.” (¶24)
“To obtain discovery, a party must show the trial court that justice requires that the party gain access to the materials sought and that the request is not intended to delay the proceedings or to intimidate, harass, or otherwise abuse the recipient of the requests.” (¶25)
Factual background
Doe and Roe had a history of filing protection from abuse complaints against each other. Doe alleged that Roe had threatened her life, stalked and followed her, repeatedly called her workplace, and stolen money from her friend. After Roe sought discovery concerning the allegations and other matters, the trial court allowed only thirteen interrogatories and denied the remaining interrogatories and document requests.
Procedural history
Doe filed a protection from abuse complaint against Roe, and the District Court issued a temporary protection from abuse order. The court granted a continuance so Roe could seek discovery, later permitted Roe to pursue thirteen interrogatories, denied the remaining interrogatories and document requests, and stayed discovery pending appeal. The Supreme Judicial Court permitted the interlocutory appeal under the collateral order exception and affirmed.