Dow v. Dickinson

• Court: Superior Court of Maine
• Decided: September 1, 2006
• Docket: CUMre-05-183
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

,. .J' 1 . . STATE OF MAINE . . 1 -. . , '.I,. .. ..: ' SUPERIOR COURT . . . CUMBERLAND, ss. ' .

.. .. ! . I

. , . / . I . CIVIL ACTION Docket No. RE-05-183

ELIZABETH DOW,

Plaintiff,

ORDER

ELIZABETH WARD DICKINSON, et al.,

Defendants.

Before the court is plaintiff Elizabeth Dow's motion for a Rule 35 mental

examination of defendant Elizabeth Dickinson, who is Dow's mother. A hearing was

held on the motion on August 29,2006.

For the reasons stated at the hearing, the court concludes that Diclunson,

although perhaps only a party-in-interest or a necessary party under Rule 19(a)(2)(i),is

a party subject to Rule 35. Diclunson has not put her mental capacity in controversy but

her capacity has been put in controversy by Dow.

Ultimately, however, the court concludes that Dow has not shown good cause to

subject Diclunson to a mental examination against her will under the circumstances of

this case. The materials submitted in support of Dow's request establish - and

Dickinson acknowledges - that Dickinson suffers from alcoholism, that she operated a

motor vehcle under the influence in June 2005, that she has responded in a highly

emotional manner to Dow's decision beginning in June 2005 not to let her see her

grandchildren, and that in a bout of depression she voluntarily admitted herself to

Spring Harbor for three days last September. At the same time, it is not disputed that Dichnson has maintained sobriety since

June 2005, that she has obtained treatment at the Mercy Outpatient Program, that she

now regularly attends AA meetings, that she currently works with chldren at a daycare

in Yarmouth, and that she maintains her own home, pays her own bills, and makes all

necessary decisions with respect to her daily activities.

To establish that someone lacks mental capacity, it must be shown that the

person in question lacks sufficient capacity to make responsible decisions with respect

to her person and to manage her affairs. See 18-A M.R.S. 5 5-101; Guardianshp of K-M,

2005 ME 8 ¶¶ 3, 5, 8, 11-13, 866 A.2d 106, 109-11. This is a high standard to meet. The

court concludes that the materials submitted by Dow fall short of showing that there is

a sufficient question as to her mother's current mental capacity to justify subjecting

Dichnson to a psychatric examination against her will.

The entry shall be:

Plaintiff's motion for a Rule 35 mental examination is denied. The clerk is

directed to incorporate this order in the docket by reference pursuant to Rule 79(a).

DATED: September 1,2006

dL Thomas D. Warren Justice, Superior Court COURTS d County x 287 ? 041 12-0287

DENNIS O'DONOVAN ESQ TWO MONUMENT SQUARE PORTLAND ME 04101-4036

JR T S ~nty

FRANK CHOWDRY ESQ PO BOX 4510 PORTLAND ME 04112