Maine Revised Statutes
Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 19-A, § 1558 (2026)
Authority for blood or tissue-typing tests
✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
ME-LEGlegislature.maine.gov
JustiaTitle on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
(REPEALED)
SECTION HISTORY
PL 1995, c. 694, §B2 (NEW). PL 1995, c. 694, §E2 (AFF). PL 2015, c. 296, Pt. B, §5 (RP). PL 2015, c. 296, Pt. D, §1 (AFF).
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 4
cases, 2001–2010 · leading case: Stitham v. Henderson, 2001 ME 52, 768 A.2d 598.
Stitham v. Henderson, 2001 ME 52, 768 A.2d 598. “19-A M.R.S.A. § 1558 (1998). Henderson's argument that only Stitham can be considered the "alleged father" because Stitham brought the action is without merit.”
Guardianship of K-M, 2005 ME 8, 866 A.2d 106. “§ 101-B(1) (2003); and putative parents and their children can be required to undergo blood testing, 19-A M.R.S.A. § 1558 (1998). An evidentiary hearing is not required in any of the above rules or statutes.”
Godsoe v. Godsoe, 2010 ME 42, 995 A.2d 232. “The Judgment on Appeal [¶ 10] On November 26, 2008, Donald filed a new action against Elizabeth and Wiers, seeking: (1) an order that Wiers and the child undergo genetic testing, pursuant to 19-A M.R.S. § 1558 (2009), to determine the child’s paternity; (2) a finding, pursuant…”
Dep't of Human Servs. v. Poulin, 2002 ME 54, 794 A.2d 639. “The Department later filed a motion for blood or tissue-typing tests pursuant to 19-A M.R.S.A. § 1558 (1998), and an opposition memorandum to Poulin’s motion to dismiss.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.