• Facebook
  • Youtube
  • Linkedin
  • Twitter
  • Instagram
  • Vk
Call Us At: (408) 553-0801
Lonich Patton Ehrlich Policastri
  • Home
  • About
    • Why LPEP
    • Our Attorneys
    • Locations
      • San Jose
      • Santa Cruz
    • Testimonials
  • LPEP Spotlight
  • Practice Areas
    • Family Law
      • Annulments
      • Certified Family Law Specialists
      • Child Custody and Visitation
      • Child Support
      • Divorce and Your Estate
      • Divorce Litigation
      • Divorce Planning
      • Domestic Partnerships
      • Domestic Violence
      • Enforcement and Modifications
      • Extramarital Affairs
      • Grandparents’ Rights
      • Harassment
      • Legal Separation
      • Mediation and Collaborative Divorce
      • Parental Relocations
      • Paternity
      • Postnuptial Agreements
      • Prenuptial Agreements
      • Property Division
      • Restraining Orders
      • Same Sex Divorce
      • Spousal Support and Alimony
    • Estate Planning
      • Business Succession Planning
      • Power of Attorney
      • Probate
      • Trust Administration
      • Trust and Probate Litigation
      • Trusts
      • Wills
  • FAQ
    • Estate Planning FAQ
    • Family Law FAQ
  • Blog
  • Pay Now
  • Resources
    • Family Law Resources
    • Estate Planning Resources
  • Contact Us
    • Careers
  • Get a Free Consultation
  • Menu

Posts

Filing for Divorce After a Temporary Restraining Order

November 3, 2017/in Family Law /by Michael Lonich

For many people in abusive marriages, the question is not whether to file for divorce or stick it out in a violent marriage.  The question is how to file for divorce while remaining physically and financially safe from retaliatory spousal abuse. Audrina Patridge faced this exact question.  Until recently, Audrina was stuck in an abusive marriage where she faced an aggressive, controlling, and physically threatening spouse.  It is reported that Audrina wanted to file for divorce but she was scared that if she did, her husband, Corey Bohan, would retaliate with physical harm to Audrina, their one-year old daughter, or Audrina’s family members.  Like others in similar situations, Audrina was scared to file for divorce without additional protection.  Fortunately, the Family Court can provide additional protections for people in Audrina’s situation.  That additional protection comes in the form of a Domestic Violence Temporary Restraining Order (DVTRO). On September 18, 2017, Audrina was granted a DVTRO against Corey.  Audrina sought the restraining order as a protective measure for herself and her family members while she initiated divorce proceedings against Corey.

A DVTRO provides the abused spouse immediate, but temporary protection from the alleged abuser.  There are numerous protections available under a DVTRO, protections that go far beyond simply keeping the alleged abuser away from the abused spouse.  Additional available protections include, but are not limited to, child custody and support, an order for the alleged abuser to move out of the residence, orders that specify which spouse must pay debts, and property control.  The myriad protections available under a DVTRO address the reality of domestic violence situations; the abused individual needs to protect their physical and financial safety, as well as that of their children, or other family members, including pets.  For Audrina, the DVTRO enabled her to file for divorce with the confidence that she and her family would be safe from threats or acts of violence from Corey.  With the DVTRO in place, Audrina filed her petition for divorce on September 20, 2017.

When a DVTRO is issued precedent to or simultaneously with a petition for divorce, the terms of the DVTRO necessarily become the status quo at the start of the divorce proceeding.  Thus, it is important that an abused spouse obtain a DVTRO with as many protections as are applicable to their unique situation, as those terms will likely remain in place, regardless of the outcome of the domestic violence proceeding. By example, if the abused spouse requested a “move out” order and/or exclusive use and possession of the family residence, the alleged abuser will have to find alternate housing, and often, the alleged abuser will have to do so even after the DVTRO expires.  When child custody orders originate from a DVTRO, the Court will modify custody orders only in rare instances, and typically it will only do so after numerous court appearances, and/or other ancillary interventions that take place over many months, e.g., the alleged abuser having professionally supervised visitation, parenting/anti-abuse classes, etc.  In light of the above, it is critical that individuals who need a DVTRO to enable them to safely initiate divorce proceedings, consult with an attorney to carefully draft their DVTRO.

For more information about obtaining a DVTRO and/or a divorce in California, please contact our attorneys at Lonich Patton Ehrlich Policastri.  Please remember that each individual situation is unique and results discussed in this post are not a guarantee of future results.  While this post may include legal issues, it is not legal advice.  Use of this site does not create an attorney-client relationship.

https://www.lpeplaw.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/LPEP_PC.png 0 0 Michael Lonich https://www.lpeplaw.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/LPEP_PC.png Michael Lonich2017-11-03 11:03:282021-12-22 20:09:46Filing for Divorce After a Temporary Restraining Order

Domestic Violence: “Abuse” Encompasses More than Just Physical Blows

July 12, 2013/in Family Law /by Gina Policastri

Domestic violence scholars have questioned the appropriateness of the ever-present inquiry, “why did she stay?” Professor and author Martha Mahoney describe the importance of understanding the complexity of women’s experience and struggle and “recast[ing] the entire discussion of separation in terms of the batter’s violent attempts at control.”*

“Every legal case that discusses the question ‘why didn’t she leave?’ implies that the woman could have left.”*  The threat of violence and the aggressor’s continued control preventing women from leaving, financial dependence, and emotional ties are some of the reasons she cites.*

Mahoney writes that battered women often struggle with denial (a defense mechanism which allows us to unconsciously “disavow…[the] external reality….which [is] consciously intolerable.”).** Victims of domestic violence also “tend to minimize the history of assault against them and the pain they have suffered.”**

Often this denial is a result of the belief that the abuse suffered is not “bad enough” to qualify as domestic violence.  Many Californians believe that they have to be hit or display bruising in order to be considered a victim of domestic violence. This notion, however, is very far from the truth.  The definition of “abuse” included in California’s Domestic Violence Prevention Act (“DVPA”) is intentionally broad.  There are many ways in which we can suffer abuse, including psychological abuse, stalking, financial abuse, and in some instances, even cyber-bullying. Take a look at the California Family Code statute that outlines what our state considers impermissible “abuse”:

“For purposes of this act, ‘abuse’ means any of the following:

a)      Intentionally or recklessly to cause or attempt to cause bodily injury;

b)      Sexual assault;

c)       To place a person in reasonable apprehension of imminent serious bodily injury to that person or to another; or

d)      To engage in any behavior that has been or could be enjoined pursuant to Section 6320.”

Cal. Fam. Code § 6203.

The first two sections of Section 6203 (above) are easily recognized as traditional forms of domestic violence –  when a person suffers physical injury or sexual assault at the hands of their partner it is clear instance of DV. The last two prongs, (b) and (c), however, leave room for interpretation. Section (c) refers to what a reasonable, average person would find threatening to such an extent that they fear that they or someone else will be seriously harmed by the alleged perpetrator, and imminently.

Section (d), however, expands the concept of abuse to include more than violent abuse alone.  Section 6320(a) of the family code includes a long list of behaviors that can be halted by restraining order:

“The court may issue an ex parte order enjoining a party from molesting, attacking, striking, stalking, threatening, sexually assaulting, battering, harassing, telephoning, including, but not limited to, making annoying telephone calls…., destroying personal property, contacting, either directly or indirectly, by mail or otherwise, coming within a specified distance of, or disturbing the peace of the other party, and, in the discretion of the court, on a showing of good cause, of other named family or household members.” Cal. Fam. Code § 6320(a).

As can be seen, the DVPA’s definition of abuse is intentionally broad, and a restraining order may be appropriate protection from a myriad of different kinds of abuse. One notable catch-all provision in Section 6320(a) is “disturbing the peace,” meaning that a restraining order may be granted against someone who is disturbing your peace. What does it mean exactly?  “[T]he plain meaning of the phrase “disturbing the peace of the other party” in section 6320 may be properly understood as conduct that destroys the mental or emotional calm of the other party.” In re Marriage of Nadkarni (2009) 173 Cal.App.4th 1483, 1497.

In Nadkarni, the husband broke into the wife’s email account, learned and tracked her constant whereabouts, and distributed personal and business information about the wife and her business interests.  This conduct, the wife alleged, caused her “to suffer ‘shock’ and embarrassment,’ to fear the destruction of her ‘business relationships,’ and to fear for her safety.” Nadkarni, at 1499.  It is important to note that the court found that because of the past physical abuse against her by the husband, the wife’s fears regarding the husband’s potential for further abusive conduct in the future were reasonable.

If your partner is harassing you or treating you in a way that “destroys your mental or emotional calm,” you may be a victim of domestic violence and you can seek relief from the court.  The Court has discretion to issue a restraining order pursuant to the DVPA if the court is satisfied by “reasonable proof of a past act or acts of abuse.”  See Nakamura v. Parker, 156 Cal. App. 4th 327, 334 (2007); Cal. Fam. Code § 6300.

This is huge for California residents because, “[a]buse takes many forms. It’s more than just the obvious slap in the face, punch, or push. It’s about power and control, any way possible.”*** Californians are no longer forced to suffer in silence but instead get a helping hand from the courts on their journey to a better home life. The purpose of DVPA is to prevent the reoccurrence of acts of violence and to separate the parties so the causes of violence can be resolved.  Cal. Fam. Code § 6220.  In addition, under the DVPA, after notice and a hearing the Court may issue an order for the payment of attorney’s fees and costs to the prevailing party.  Cal. Fam. Code § 6344.

If you believe that you may be suffering from domestic violence, or are contemplating a divorce, please contact our California Certified Family Law Specialists (as certified by the State Bar of California Board of Legal Specialization) at Lonich Patton Ehrlich Policastri. Our attorneys have decades of experience handling complex Family Law matters and here to meet with you and offer you a free consultation. Life is too short to live with an abusive partner.

Please remember that each individual situation is unique and results discussed in this post are not a guarantee of future results. While this post may include legal issues, it is not legal advice. Use of this site does not create an attorney-client relationship.

 

 

*Martha R. Mahoney, Legal Images of Battered Women: Redefining the Issue of Separation, 90 Mich. L. Rev. 1 (1991).

**Julie Blackman, Potential Uses for Expert Testimony: Ideas Toward the Representation of Battered Women Who Kill, 9 WOMEN’S RTS. L. REP. 227, 228-29 (1986).

***Quote by Julie Saffren, Santa Clara University Law Professor and Domestic Violence attorney, from San Jose Mercury News, “Domestic Violence: Bill Targets Cyberbullying,” printed July 1, 2013; quote obtained with permission from Mrs. Saffren.

https://www.lpeplaw.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/LPEP_PC.png 0 0 Gina Policastri https://www.lpeplaw.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/LPEP_PC.png Gina Policastri2013-07-12 11:26:322021-12-22 21:20:50Domestic Violence: “Abuse” Encompasses More than Just Physical Blows

Automatic Temporary Restraining Orders

December 2, 2010/in Family Law /by Julia Lemon

Automatic Temporary Restraining Orders

Once a divorce or legal separation is filed, a set of Family Law Automatic Temporary Restraining Orders (ATROs) take effect. There are four standard mutual restraining orders that take effect automatically when the petition for dissolution is filed (as to the petitioner) and when the petition for dissolution is served (as to the respondent).    The restraining orders restrain both parties from doing the following:

  1. Removing the parties’ minor child(ren) from the state without the prior written consent of the other spouse or a court order.
  2. Transferring, encumbering, concealing or disposing of any property, real or personal, community or separate, without the written consent of the other party or a court order.
  3. Insurance Coverage – Spouses are prohibited from changing beneficiaries, altering, canceling, borrowing against, cashing, or transferring any insurance including health, automobile, life, and disability insurances.  This means that you cannot, for example, cancel your spouse’s health or auto insurance or change the beneficiaries of any life insurance policies during the pendency of a dissolution proceeding.
  4. Creation and Modification of Non Probate Transfers: Both spouses are prohibited in creating non probate transfers or modifying a nonprobate transfer in a manner that affects the disposition of the property subject to transfer, without the written consent of the other party or a court order. A non probate transfer includes revocable trusts, a financial institution pay on death account, Totten trust, and transfers on death registration of personal property. This does not include wills.

Spouses are also required to notify the other spouse of extraordinary expenditures at least five business days in advance and to account for these expenditures to the court.  They are, however, allowed to use community, quasi-community, or their own separate property to pay an attorney.

It is important to speak to your attorney to determine what is within your purview to create, modify or change while your divorce or other legal action is pending.

For more information about divorce and restraining orders, please contact the divorce attorneys at Lonich Patton Ehrlich Policastri.  Please remember that each individual situation is unique and results discussed in this post are not a guarantee of future results.  While this post may include legal issues, it is not legal advice.  Use of this site does not create an attorney-client relationship.

https://www.lpeplaw.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/LPEP_PC.png 0 0 Julia Lemon https://www.lpeplaw.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/LPEP_PC.png Julia Lemon2010-12-02 13:54:502021-12-22 21:59:24Automatic Temporary Restraining Orders
Learn more about estate planning with a free resource
Read all about family law and child custody
Learn more about family law matters such as private divorce counseling.

Categories

  • 2021
  • 2022
  • 2023
  • Business Law
  • Estate Planning
  • Family Law
  • Firm News
  • In the Community
  • News
  • Personal
  • Probate
  • Spotlight

Posts From The Past 12 Months

  • March 2023
  • February 2023
  • January 2023
  • December 2022
  • November 2022
  • October 2022
  • September 2022
  • August 2022
  • July 2022
  • June 2022
  • May 2022
  • April 2022

Explore Our Archives

Free 30-Minute Family Law or Estate Planning Consultation

3 + 5 = ?

Link to: Contact Us

Contact Us

LONICH PATTON EHRLICH POLICASTRI

1871 The Alameda, Suite 400, San Jose, CA 95126
Phone: (408) 553-0801 | Fax: (408) 553-0807 | Email: contact@lpeplaw.com

Located in San Jose, Lonich Patton Ehrlich Policastri handles matters for clients in northern California, specifically San Jose and Silicon Valley. Our services are available to anyone within the following counties: Santa Clara, San Mateo, Contra Costa, Santa Cruz, Monterey, and San Benito. For a full listing of areas where we practice, please click here.

DISCLAIMER

This web site is intended for informational purposes only and is not legal advice. Nothing in the site is to be considered as either creating an attorney-client relationship between the reader and Lonich Patton Ehrlich Policastri or as rendering of legal advice for any specific matter. Readers are responsible for obtaining such advice from their own legal counsel. No client or other reader should act or refrain from acting on the basis of any information contained in Lonich Patton Ehrlich Policastri Web site without seeking appropriate legal or other professional advice on the particular facts and circumstances at issue.

About | Why LPEP | Contact | Blog

© 2023 Copyright Lonich Patton Ehrlich Policastri. All rights reserved. Privacy Policy

Scroll to top

LPEP COVID-19 Office Protocol