Legal Opinion
Louise Dorr v. Sarah Woodard
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
Decided May 26, 2016No. Docket Ken-14-551PublishedCited by 13 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
*469Majority: SAUFLEY, C.J., and ALEXANDER, MEAD, GORMAN, HJELM, and HUMPHREY, JJ.
Dissent: JABAR, J.
SAUFLEY, C.J.
[¶ 1] Louise Dorr appeals from a judgment of the District Court (Augusta, E, Walker, J.) dismissing for lack of standing her petition for court-ordered visitation with her granddaughter pursuant to the Grandparents Visitation Act, 19-A M.R.S. §§ 1801-1805 (2015). We conclude that Dorr’s petition and affidavit did not demonstrate “urgent reasons,” or other compelling interests, sufficient .to justify the requested intrusion on Woodard’s constitutional right to be free from litigation…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- United States v. SalernoSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
- Troxel v. GranvilleSupreme Court of the United States · 2000
- United States v. RainesSupreme Court of the United States · 1960
- Rideout v. RiendeauSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 2000
- Matthew W. Pitts v. Amanda M. MooreSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 2014
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- Deborah E. Lamkin v. Corrie L. LamkinSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 2018
- Lamkin v. LamkinSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 2018
- Gessner v. StateSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 2017
- Mark I. Gessner v. State of MaineSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 2017
- Jeremiah Hogan v. Lincoln Medical PartnersSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 2025
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.