## Facts

- Mark R. Martin (father) and Marylou E. MacMahan (mother) are the biological parents of twins born in 2014.
- MacMahan lacked resources to care for the children, and the couple did not have a vehicle.
- Dawn Ostrander, MacMahan’s lifelong friend, and Dawn’s husband, James Ostrander, provided the children’s basic needs from infancy, including diapers, formula, and clothing.
- Dawn regularly drove MacMahan and the children to medical appointments and otherwise assisted with day-to-day care.
- When the twins were about four months old, Martin moved the family to Kansas in hopes of finding employment and housing.
- Martin was arrested in Kansas for shoplifting and thereafter generally remained in Kansas.
- With no money, housing, or transportation, MacMahan and the children returned to Maine with Dawn’s help; Dawn brought them back and the Ostranders provided the children’s care.
- The children lived primarily with the Ostranders, who provided ongoing, hands-on caregiving and financial support; the children’s teachers and healthcare providers dealt with the Ostranders as the consistent caregivers.
- Martin refused to bring the children to Kansas, and the children stayed in Maine with the Ostranders.
- In June 2017, Martin filed for divorce from MacMahan.
- In April 2018, the Ostranders obtained a protection-from-abuse order against MacMahan on the children’s behalf.
- After the protection order, Martin contacted the Ostranders and gave them temporary legal authority over the children.
- The children visited Martin for a few months in 2018 but otherwise resided with the Ostranders.
- In November 2018, the Ostranders filed an action seeking a determination of de facto parentage, an allocation of parental rights and responsibilities, and child support.
- Martin opposed the de facto parentage claim and sought sole parental rights and responsibilities.
- After a trial, the District Court found that the Ostranders proved each element required for de facto parentage and determined that the children’s best interests required that their primary residence be with the Ostranders.
- The court also entered child support orders and amended the parties’ existing divorce judgment; Martin appealed.

## Issues

1. Did the evidence and Maine’s de facto parentage statute support the District Court’s determination that Dawn and James Ostrander were de facto parents of the twins?
2. Did the District Court abuse its discretion in allocating parental rights and responsibilities (including primary residence) and ordering child support based on the children’s best interests?
3. Did the District Court err by amending the parents’ divorce judgment in a manner inconsistent with the contemporaneous judgment allocating parental rights and responsibilities among the parents and de facto parents?

## Decision

- The Maine Supreme Judicial Court affirmed the judgment determining that the Ostranders are de facto parents.
- The Court affirmed the allocation of parental rights and responsibilities (including primary residence with the Ostranders) and affirmed the child support orders.
- The Court concluded that the trial court’s findings were supported by competent evidence, including that MacMahan accepted and supported the Ostranders’ parental role and that Martin knew or should have known of the de facto parent-child relationship and chose to abdicate his financial and caregiving responsibilities.
- The Court vacated the separate judgment amending the existing divorce judgment because it conflicted with the judgment establishing and allocating parental rights and responsibilities.
- The Court remanded for entry of a corrected divorce-judgment amendment consistent with the operative parental-rights judgment.

## Legal Principles

- Under Maine law, a nonparent may be adjudicated a de facto parent when the statutory elements are proven, including a parent-like relationship with the child, assumption of parental responsibilities without expectation of financial compensation, and legal-parent consent, support, or knowing acquiescence coupled with failure to perform parental functions.
- Once de facto parentage is established, the court may allocate parental rights and responsibilities among legal parents and de facto parents based on the child’s best interests, including designation of primary residence.
- Child support may be ordered and apportioned among those adjudicated to have parental rights and responsibilities, consistent with Maine’s child support framework.
- On appeal, factual findings supporting de facto parentage and best-interests determinations are reviewed for clear error, while the ultimate allocation of parental rights and responsibilities and support is reviewed for abuse of discretion.
- A court may amend an existing divorce judgment to reflect later parental-rights determinations, but any amendment must match the operative parental-rights judgment to avoid conflicting custody and decision-making directives.

## Conclusion

Martin v. MacMahan held that long-term caregivers who assumed full parental functions for the twins, with the mother’s support and the father’s knowing acquiescence and abdication, could be adjudicated de facto parents, and it upheld the resulting custody and child support orders; however, because the trial court’s amendment to the parents’ divorce judgment conflicted with the new parental-rights judgment, the Law Court vacated that amendment and remanded for correction.


Martin v. MacMahan, 264 A.3d 1224 (2022)