2023 Abuse/Harassment

A 209A Abuse Prevention Order is issued, it is does not appear to a legal basis, but it is upheld none the less

A 209A Abuse Prevention Order is issued, it is upheld

A 209A Abuse Prevention Order is issued, with basis, it is upheld

A 209A Abuse Prevention Order is issued, the defendant has difficulty showing up to court, but the restraining order stays in effect

A 209A Abuse Prevention Order is issued, the defendant has difficulty showing up to court, but the restraining order stays in effect

A 209A Abuse Prevention Order is issued, but at the full hearing the court finds that there is not a basis for the order, on appeal the panel agrees

A 258E Harassment Prevention Order is issued (it is not made clear why it was not a 209A abuse order), for reason and upheld upon review

An odd case, testimony is given to justify a 209a restraining order for one party, but another party applies and gets it.  Despite this error the order is upheld

A 209A abuse prevention order is issued on no legal basis, upon review it is vacated

A 209A abuse prevention order is issued on no legal basis, upon review it is vacated

A 258Eharassement prevention order is issued on no legal basis, upon review it is vacated

A 209A abuse prevention order is issued,  while there is questionable behavior and allegation of a past rape (which could still be prosecutable) the requirements needed as a basis for an order do not appear to be present, none the less the order is up held

A 209A abuse prevention order is issued on no legal basis, upon review it is vacated

A 258Eharassement prevention order is issued on no legal basis, upon review it is vacated

An incarcerated defendant tries to have a  209a restraining order overturned and is not successful

A 209a restraining order is issued, upon review it is found there was no basis for the order and it is vacated,   It is also ordered that all records of the restraining order held by law enforcement should be destroyed.

A pro-se litigant tries again to vacate a restraining order.  Although based on the what the panel said in the 2018 appeal, there did not appear to be a basis for the order, the order still stays in place

A 258E protection order is issued, for good reason based on allegations of bizarre behavior

A 258E protection order is issued, an appeal is filed.  It appears that the lower court judge overstepped their authority and tried to do things not covered by a protection order.  The panel found that the order was not properly issued.

Allegations that serve as a basis for obtaining a restraining order are made, and a restraining order is issued

A 258E protection order is issued, an appeal is filed.  According to the panel there is no legitimate reason is give for the appeal.

The standard for renewing a harassment order is pretty low, but not non existent.  That standard is not met here and the order is remanded

The defendant wants his record expunged, the court declines

Allegations of threats of violence are alleged, a restraining order is issued

A restraining order is vacated by the appeals court, on remand no restraining order is issued, which results in this appeal.  On appeal the panel upholds the denial of a restraining order

The court had no choice but to issue this restraining order, however the allegations if true, should have prompted further investigation

There had been a history of violence, but there was no longer the reason to believe it was imminent, a requirement to obtain a 209a restraining order

A 258E protection order is issued, an appeal is filed.  After reading this one it is hard to believe there is a legitimate reason for their existence, however it is the law

A 258E protection order is issued, an appeal is filed.  According to the panel there is no legitimate reason is give for the appeal.  Which could be true, but one cannot tell when the arguments are not posted

Threatening to kill someone, is as good as actually doing violence, a restraining order is issued.

Property damage is done to the plaintiff it is assumed that it was done by the defendant and a restraining order ensues.

A 209a restraining order where there was no legal basis for issuing it, and the order is vacated

The plaintiff tries to obtain a 209a Abuse Prevention order, but the testimony did not support its issuance, so they try and get a 258E harassment order, the panel concludes the testimony did not support that either and vacated the order

An ex parte 209a restraining order is obtained the same day the defendant is served with divorce papers.  As part of the order the defendant is initially not allowed to see the children, then allowed to see the children supervised and then see the children unsupervised

In reviewing this case the panel does not justify any of these actions regarding the children, which are rather extreme.  

It is noted that transcripts from several of the hearings were not available to the court.  The court does not clarify if this was because the parties did not present them or because the recordings were not available, which should be seen as a serious issue by the court, if they were not available

A 209a restraining order is issued in District Court, child support is also requested, however the District Court judge chooses to have the parties resolve this child related issue in Probate Court where a case had already been opened, the Probate Court resided in the same building.  

This matter should have been resolved in a timely manner by the Probate Court, it is unclear that it was not.  In fact it is unclear that there was any rational for this appeal.  It is concerning that the panel claims that they learned of pertinent facts related to the case during argument, it is unclear if any evidence was provided to support these "facts".  

The case is based on a vague set of "facts", and is a poor reflection on the court.

The initial issuance of the 209a restraining order is what is being appealed.  It does not appear that there was a basis for issuance of the 209a order, none the less the court upholds the issuance of the 209a restraining order.  

If an appeal is not filed in a timely manner the Appeals Court may choose to decide you lose, that is what happened here

The plaintiff gets a pro se 209A restraining order from the Probate Court for themself and a child, on the return date (a month later, rather than the required 10 day) after a hearing the Probate Court does not extend the order.  The plaintiff then goes to the District Court and obtains a restraining order.  During the pendency of the Probate Court proceedings the District Court renewed the 209a restraining order.  At the conclusion of the Probate Court proceedings the court determined that the allegations of abuse were not credible and made orders contradicting the District Court 209a ruling.  This case resulted from an extension of the 209a order.

The conclusion of this opinions rests on the actions of the attorney in this case not bringing the appeal forward in a timely manner (after the plaintiff went judge shopping in the District Court), ignoring the responsibility of the court itself when addressing these matters.   The attorney in this case also failed to raise the issue of the findings made by the Probate Judge regarding these issues to the the District Court.

The appeal appears to fail because of inadequate representation by council.

D.S. vs. T.M.  Byrne 

Rubin, Englander, Hand 

The story of the bad roommate (not even a roommate, but the guest who won't leave).  The harassment order is used to help evict them.