248 results for 'cat:"Restraining Order"'.
J. Reynolds Fitzgerald finds that the lower court properly issued a two-year order of protection based on the finding that a father stalked the mother of his child because evidence amply indicates the father meant to annoy or harass the mother, and a best interests analysis supported the decision to award the mother sole legal and primary physical custody. Affirmed.
Court: New York Appellate Divisions, Judge: Reynolds Fitzgerald, Filed On: November 22, 2023, Case #: 533906, Categories: Family Law, restraining Order
J. Marks partially grants a refrigeration company's motion for a temporary restraining order against two former employees in a misappropriation of trade secrets complaint. The employees and any other person or entity that they participate with are hereby enjoined from accessing or disclosing any more information belonging to the company or soliciting business from any person or entity of the refrigeration company. All confidential information and equipment shall be returned within 24 hours. The employees must preserve all evidence that could be relevant to this suit.
Court: USDC Middle District of Alabama, Judge: Marks, Filed On: November 17, 2023, Case #: 1:23cv667, NOS: Defend Trade Secrets Act of 2016 (DTSA) - Property Rights, Categories: Trade Secrets, restraining Order
Want access to unlimited case records and advanced research tools? Create your free CasePortal account now. No credit card required to register.
Try CasePortal for Free
J. Hellman finds the trial court erred by determining that the statutory requirements for an SPO were satisfied. “Even though the message unequivocally detailed serious personal violence—DS’s murder at her workplace the next day—an imminent threat must convey that serious personal violence is ‘impending,’ ‘near at hand,’ or ‘menacingly near.’” Reversed.
Court: Oregon Court of Appeals, Judge: Hellman, Filed On: November 15, 2023, Case #: A179952, Categories: restraining Order, Identity Theft
J. Gladwin finds the circuit court properly entered a final order of protection against the husband, accused of verbally threatened to kill his wife, threatening to kill her parents and threatening to ruin his wife’s career. He also spit in her face, punched holes in the wall by her, threw furniture at her, shot a gun above her head during an argument and texted her a photo of himself with the barrel of a rifle in his mouth. All evidence supports the order. The husband was also properly served. His entry of appearance and motion for continuance expressly acknowledged the court’s jurisdiction over both parties, consenting to that jurisdiction. Affirmed.
Court: Arkansas Court Of Appeals, Judge: Gladwin, Filed On: November 8, 2023, Case #: CV-22-387, Categories: Evidence, restraining Order, Jurisdiction
J. Hester finds that the trial court properly granted an order of protection against the alleged stalking perpetrator. In this case, the victim stated that he was a former friend of the perpetrator who thought they were in a relationship, and that he had been harassing him through email and social media, pretending to be him on media apps. Further, the victim testified that he had not contacted the perpetrator for over two years, and that the perpetrator continued to contact him and his girlfriend and brought up his four-year-old son in emails. Affirmed.
Court: Louisiana Court Of Appeal, Judge: Hester, Filed On: November 3, 2023, Case #: 2023 CA 0335, Categories: Evidence, restraining Order
J. Brown finds the county court properly extended an order of protection against the ex-husband. The original order was sought by the ex-wife on allegations that the ex-husband had thrown objects at her head, choked her and had pulled her around by the hair. The ex-wife indicated that she was afraid due his instability and threats and showing up unexpectedly at her and her friend’s residences “in disguise.” The request for the order of protection was granted based also on evidence of the ex-husband’s other ex-wife and attorney winning orders of protection against him as well as great amounts of other evidence. All evidence supports the extension. Defendant does not point to evidence in the record showing that the court did not consider evidence calling the ex-wife’s credibility into question. Affirmed.
Court: Arkansas Court Of Appeals, Judge: Brown, Filed On: November 1, 2023, Case #: CV-22-618, Categories: Evidence, restraining Order
J. Molaison finds that the trial court properly granted a mother's protective order against the father because the mother testified that the father repeatedly stalked her, showed up at her work, and attempted to strangle her. However, it is unclear if the parties' child is among the protected persons in the order because no finding of abuse was made under the Louisiana Children’s Code, and the trial court implemented weekend visitation for the child and the father. Affirmed.
Court: Louisiana Court Of Appeal, Judge: Molaison, Filed On: October 31, 2023, Case #: 23-CA-173, Categories: Evidence, Family Law, restraining Order
J. Dato finds that substantial evidence supported granting a domestic violence restraining order to an adult son whose mother threatened him. She repeatedly contacted him after he asked her to stop verbally and in writing, and the trial court was within its discretion to consider an out-of-state restraining order on the mother. Also, her facial challenge to the statute that bars subjects of restraining orders from possessing firearms fails because the constitution protects the rights of law-abiding citizens to possess firearms, and the trial court found she was not law-abiding. Affirmed.
Court: California Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Dato, Filed On: October 31, 2023, Case #: D081250, Categories: Civil Rights, restraining Order, Firearms
J. Prescott finds defendant's conviction for violating a protective order was supported by sufficient evidence. Although the victim was not at her business when defendant went there to retrieve personal belongings, he went there despite knowing the order forbid him from going to her workplace, while testimony from the victim proved psychological harm as a result of threats made to coworkers. Affirmed.
Court: Connecticut Court Of Appeals, Judge: Prescott, Filed On: October 27, 2023, Case #: AC45104, Categories: Evidence, restraining Order
J. Weingart finds that the trial court should have granted a mother a domestic violence restraining order against her child's father. The father's calls for police welfare checks were abusive because they were based on false information and lacked any legitimate support. A hearing is required for the trial court to consider any evidence or testimony for or against a restraining order. Reversed.
Court: California Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Weingart, Filed On: October 18, 2023, Case #: B322439, Categories: Family Law, restraining Order
J. Bishop finds the district court properly denied the motion to vacate a domestic abuse protection order filed by the mother against her child’s father. The father did not produce any admissible evidence to support his alleged untimely service or receipt of the court’s order for hearing. His affidavit was deemed inadmissible, and his counsel could have asked for a continuance to allow him an opportunity to testify as to when he received notice. No continuance was requested. No abuse of discretion is found. Affirmed.
Court: Nebraska Court Of Appeals, Judge: Bishop, Filed On: October 17, 2023, Case #: A-23-195, Categories: Family Law, Due Process, restraining Order
J. Triana finds that the trial court properly issued a protective order against an ex-boyfriend, preventing him from communicating or interacting with his former girlfriend. The harassing comments made by the ex-boyfriend do not constitute a protected form of speech since they were solely communicated to "inflict emotional distress". Affirmed.
Court: Texas Courts of Appeals, Judge: Triana, Filed On: October 13, 2023, Case #: 03-22-00071-CV, Categories: restraining Order, First Amendment
J. Kornmann dismisses two individuals from a sex discrimination and education claim because the students abandoned their equal protection claim and Title IX claims can not be brought against individual officials. The court also denies a temporary restraining order as moot. The matter stems from a preliminary injunction to enjoin the Sioux Falls School District 49-5 from eliminating the District's gymnastics program on the basis that
eliminating the gymnastics program violates Title IX and the students' Fourteenth Amendment Equal Protection rights.
Court: USDC South Dakota, Judge: Kornmann, Filed On: October 13, 2023, Case #: 4:23cv4139, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: Education, Equal Protection, restraining Order
J. Poissant finds that the trial court properly entered a protective order in favor of the couple and against their family members who allegedly exhibited threatening behavior with their guns in a dispute over a dog. Contrary to the family members' arguments, their "actions in the defense of property do not preclude a finding of family violence as necessary for a protective order." Affirmed.
Court: Texas Courts of Appeals, Judge: Poissant, Filed On: October 12, 2023, Case #: 14-22-00708-CV, Categories: Family Law, restraining Order
J. Bahr issues an order to remand a matter to the district court concerning a disorderly conduct restraining order directing a no contact order against an individual for a one-year period. The district court did not make findings of fact to explain the factual basis for granting the disorderly conduct restraining order.
Court: North Dakota Supreme Court, Judge: Bahr, Filed On: October 11, 2023, Case #: 2023ND191, Categories: restraining Order
J. Furman denies the defendants' request for attorneys' fees in a patent action related to a flashlight design. Despite the plaintiff's "egregious" conduct in not investigating the validity of its patent, fees are not warranted because the plaintiff voluntarily dismissed its case without prejudice. However, the defendants are entitled to recover a $15,000 bond submitted in accordance with a temporary restraining order in its entirety.
Court: USDC Southern District of New York, Judge: Furman, Filed On: October 11, 2023, Case #: 1:22cv10377, NOS: Patent - Property Rights, Categories: Patent, restraining Order, Attorney Fees
J. Bumb declines to impose a temporary restraining order against the university and a professor who allegedly sexually assaulted a PhD student and hindered her progress by giving her poor scores on several tests. The university is fully aware of the student's complaint and an investigation is pending into the assault. Meanwhile, the university had two new graders blindly re-score the student's failed test. Meanwhile, that she contends she is a strong student does not mean retaliation claims will likely succeed.
Court: USDC New Jersey, Judge: Bumb , Filed On: October 10, 2023, Case #: 1:23cv20657, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: Civil Rights, Education, restraining Order