Abuse Prevention Orders


Apply testimony/evidence for the issuance of a restraining order and then making it permanent. An appeal is made, but it is not successful

No allegation of violence, there is a vague threat of violence that this panel goes overboard on. It would be hard to argue that this restraining order met the standards required, and this panel does not do a particularly good job of making that case.

October 27, 2016

EN vs LN Singh

Meade, Milkey, Kinder

Horribly written decision the allegations of abuse change from one paragraph to the next, and it is difficult to determine if the underlying record is a mess or that this opinion is simply poorly written.

The allegations are quite serious and this order continues through several renewals. Some type of investigation should have done at some point to determine what was going on. This opinion makes nothing clear, and it doesn't make clear if the underlying record was a mess or this panel was making its own mess.

September 23, 2016

BC vs FC Phelan

Kafker, C.J., Hanlon, Neyman

The parties agree that the allegations that lead to issuance of a restraining order are false and ask to have it expunged from the DV registry. The court only likes to add names to the registry, and so it would not expunge this name.

September 23, 2016

MCD vs DED Bisenius

Kafker, C.J., Hanlon, Neyman

A defendant claims, and provides substantial evidence, that the specific allegations of abuse are false and asks to have his name expunged from the DV registry. The court only likes to add names to the registry, and so it would not expunge this name.

It is unclear if this restraining order should have been issued. The panel tries, unconvincingly, to argue it was needed. Clearly there was a lot going on with this family, it is unclear if the courts involvement helped.

This order issued out of the district court, while a case was being handled in the Probate and Family Court. Why the multiple venues were used should be of concern but was not addressed.

This is not a well written opinion

August 8, 2016


Carhart, Blake, Massing

This panel looked to see if the standard to issue a restraining order was met. It was not so the order was vacated.

A GAL report gets into a restraining order hearing in a District Court. It is not possible to believe the judge did not know this was completely inappropriate. It is disturbing that this panel white washes this behavior. There is no mention of why the order was issued, which is always helpful, given that the behavior of the court is often suspect. In summary this is a very poorly written opinion.

A family member gets out of jail after serving a sentence for abusing another family member. That family member gets a restraining order, this appeal followed. Given the findings of the court in the criminal matter there should be no surprise that this order was upheld

A restraining order that was not extended after a 10 day hearing is appealed, the court chose to determine the issue to be moot

The appeal of an expired restraining order is deemed moot

A six month extension of a restraining order is issued. The panel overturns that ruling, but they never explain why the order was issued in the first place