8 results for 'cat:"Due Process" AND cat:"Restraining Order"'.
J. Perry finds the lower court properly granted a protective order to a wife after a hearing concerning allegations of domestic abuse and threatening behavior by the husband after the parties had separated. The instant court finds the lower court did not abuse its discretion in granting the order, and the husband’s due process rights were not violated. Affirmed.
Court: Louisiana Court Of Appeal, Judge: Perry, Filed On: March 13, 2024, Case #: 23-560, Categories: due Process, restraining Order
J. Thyer finds the county court properly entered a protection order against the ex-husband. Text messages show he began harassing his ex-wife, saying she was undermining his relationship with their children and that she owed him for certain property. Calls and texts resulted in the ex-wife's asking police to perform a welfare check on the potentially suicidal ex-husband, following which he sent her texts about guns and threatened her. Affirmed.
Court: Arkansas Court Of Appeals, Judge: Thyer , Filed On: February 28, 2024, Case #: CV-23-91, Categories: Evidence, due Process, restraining Order
J. Barrett finds the county court improperly determined the biological father's consent was not required for his children to be adopted by their stepfather. While the biological father did not support his children and did not communicate with them, his contact with the children would have violated a protective order entered in favor of the mother. Also, the court directly affected the outcome by its failure to rule on a previous paternity petition and to set support and visitation. Reversed.
Court: Arkansas Court Of Appeals, Judge: Barrett , Filed On: February 14, 2024, Case #: CV-22-426, Categories: Family Law, due Process, restraining Order
[Consolidated.] J. Arterburn finds the county court improperly issued domestic abuse and harassment protection orders against the ex-boyfriend. Because the boyfriend had been found guilty of domestic assault, the court improperly denied him his due process right to be heard at the show-cause hearing. Reversed.
Court: Nebraska Court Of Appeals, Judge: Arterburn , Filed On: January 30, 2024, Case #: A-23-384 , Categories: due Process, restraining Order
J. Cassel, on review from the court of appeals, finds the court properly affirmed the trial court's overruling of the father's motion to vacate a protection order. Although the father challenges the appeals court’s evidentiary ruling excluding an affidavit, part of it was inadmissible, and he failed to offer the admissible portion. Affirmed.
Court: Nebraska Supreme Court, Judge: Cassel, Filed On: January 19, 2024, Case #: S-23-195, Categories: Evidence, due Process, 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. 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. Thomson finds that an appeals court correctly determined that a lower court erred in denying the woman's request for an order of protection against her alleged abuser. People seeking such orders do not need to show an "immediate need" for protection but rather simply that "domestic abuse occurred," and because the lower court never reached this issue, it improperly denied the order. Affirmed.
Court: New Mexico Supreme Court, Judge: Thomson, Filed On: July 24, 2023, Case #: S-1-SC-39140, Categories: due Process, restraining Order
J. Pirtle finds the county court properly renewed a domestic abuse protection order against the father without holding a hearing. The father argues that the court’s definition of “abuse” varies from the definition found in the relevant statute, though he does not specifically state what the difference is. The ex parte order with which he was served provided that he had 10 days to request a hearing. The record contains no indication that one was requested. Affirmed.
Court: Nebraska Court Of Appeals, Judge: Pirtle, Filed On: June 13, 2023, Case #: A-22-940, Categories: due Process, restraining Order