Subsection (c) provides that failure to successfully contest a registered order requires the tribunal to confirm the validity of the registered order. Although the statute is silent on the subject, it seems likely that res judicata requires that both the registering and nonregistering party who fail to register the "true" controlling order will be estopped from subsequently collaterally attacking the confirmed order on the basis that the unmentioned "true order should have been confirmed instead."

Sec. 40. 19-A MRSA §3252, as enacted by PL 1995, c. 694, Pt. B, §2 and affected by Pt. E, §2, is amended to read:

§3252. Effect of registration for modification

A tribunal of this State may enforce a child support order of another state registered for purposes of modification in the same manner as if the order had been issued by a tribunal of this State, but the registered order may be modified only if the requirements of section 3253, 3255 or 3257 have been met.

Uniform Comment

(This is Section 610 of the Uniform Act.)

An order registered for purposes of modification may be enforced in the same manner as an order registered for purposes of enforcement. But, the power of the forum tribunal to modify a child-support order of another tribunal is limited by the specific factual preconditions set forth in Sections 611, 613, and 615.

Sec. 41. 19-A MRSA §3253, as amended by PL 1997, c. 669, §22, is repealed and the following enacted in its place:

§3253.__Modification of child support order of another state

1.__Modification of order issued in another state.__If section 3255 does not apply, except as otherwise provided in section 3257, a tribunal of this State upon petition may modify a child support order issued in another state that has been registered in this State if, after notice and hearing, the tribunal finds that: