How do restraining orders actually work?

Factual Questions
1

If you have to stay X yards away from someone, does that mean you could be arrested if you happen to run into them at the grocery store? Or would you just be obligated to leave the area as soon as you saw them? If they show up at a restaurant where you’re having dinner, would you have to leave without finishing your meal? Likewise, would you have to leave a movie if you spotted them in the theater? What if you were both at the same hospital emergency room or something?

This question was prompted by this comic, not by personal experience.

2

[QUOTE=tim314]
If you have to stay X yards away from someone, does that mean you could be arrested if you happen to run into them at the grocery store? Or would you just be obligated to leave the area as soon as you saw them? If they show up at a restaurant where you’re having dinner, would you have to leave without finishing your meal? Likewise, would you have to leave a movie if you spotted them in the theater? What if you were both at the same hospital emergency room or something?

This question was prompted by this comic, not by personal experience.
[/QUOTE]

It depends on the state, but in most states, restraining orders are mutual regardless of who filed. In other words, just because you asked for and received a restraining order against me, it doesn’t mean that you can call me up or drop by my house if you wanted to (even if I gave permission). The order is now binding on both of us.

As such, if one of us would go to a public place like a grocery store, movie theatre, or restaurant and see the other already there, it would be an obligation of the second person who arrived to leave the area.

An emergency situation like a hospital would almost surely be allowed under the doctrine of competing harms, but the final word would be up to a judge if somebody pushed it.

3

They work darned poorly, in practice. No officers are assigned to the restrained person. For anything to happen, a complaint has to be called in. Often, the parties voluntarily violate the order. This week, in this town, a woman with an order against her husband drove to his home with the intent of having him babysit their two children. He shot her to death while the kids watched. In a wild coincidence, a local domestic violence group was holding a fundraiser in a restaurant right across the street.

Now, about the nuts-and-bolts “how”, I have only some anecdotal stuff. The orders are almost always restraining the man, so the pronouns will follow that form. If she shows up where he’s having dinner, she has to leave, not him. First one in stays.However, if she goes to the same joint every day after work, he can reasonably be expected to stay away from that joint. If she has a thing going with the guy next door to his house… Better ask the judge.

One guy I knew, on advice of his lawyer, refused to let her get near him without a sheriff’s deputy present. Divorce seems to make some people do crazy stuff.

4

[QUOTE=jtgain]
It depends on the state, but in most states, restraining orders are mutual regardless of who filed. In other words, just because you asked for and received a restraining order against me, it doesn’t mean that you can call me up or drop by my house if you wanted to (even if I gave permission). The order is now binding on both of us.

As such, if one of us would go to a public place like a grocery store, movie theatre, or restaurant and see the other already there, it would be an obligation of the second person who arrived to leave the area.
[/QUOTE]

That is very interesting, and puts quite a different light on the Simpsons episode where Lisa filed and got a restraining order on Bart. :wink:

ETA: Of course, since the state that Springfield is in will remain forever a deep mystery, we can’t be sure that they’re in one of the ones where the orders are mutual. How can we see a list of the ones where this isn’t so, by the way?

5

I know of a person who was arrested for violating a restraining order. The order itself was somewhat frivolous (she did it out of spite, but he was slightly unstable as well). The man approached the woman who filed the restraining order to return an item that was hers. She called the police. He was arrested and had to post ~$100k bail.

6

[QUOTE=jtgain]
It depends on the state, but in most states, restraining orders are mutual regardless of who filed. In other words, just because you asked for and received a restraining order against me, it doesn’t mean that you can call me up or drop by my house if you wanted to (even if I gave permission). The order is now binding on both of us.

As such, if one of us would go to a public place like a grocery store, movie theatre, or restaurant and see the other already there, it would be an obligation of the second person who arrived to leave the area.

An emergency situation like a hospital would almost surely be allowed under the doctrine of competing harms, but the final word would be up to a judge if somebody pushed it.
[/QUOTE]

Please tell me where you got this information. I am not an expert in “most states”. I can only tell you about New Jersey. The out of state orders I have seen all look the same as NJ but I can’t recall exactly which ones I have seen over the years so I won’t argue about them. New Jersey has just about the strongest laws regarding restraining orders in the country. For instance in NJ final restraining orders have no expiration date. However, a restraining order is not automatically mutual. In NJ it is definately not mutual. That is one of the first things I tell someone I am serving. I have seen it many times. The girlfriend calls and things get patched up. Pretty soon she is tired of his shit again and she calls and says he is in violation, come and arrest him. She did nothing to break the law. The RO is one way. He would have to file his own RO if he wanted one.

As for the OP, our ROs don’t have a specific distance to stay away. It lists many restrictions. Prohibited from the residence, prohibited to make any contact (written, oral, electronic), prohibited from going to the plaintiffs place of business, prohibited from having others contact the plaintiff etc… If the two happen to bump into each other in public the defendant is required to leave. A coincidence will not be a violation. If he happens to do it multiple times then it runs into the prohibited from stalking part of the RO. The defendant is obligated to leave, even in a theater, even in a restaurant. The plaintiff does not have a RO against her, she has no obligation to leave.

In NJ all violations of ROs are on no bail warrants. You go to jail, do not pass GO. That is because the order is approved at the Superior Court level. A municipal court judge can not set bail. To get out of jail you have to go before a Superior Court judge. Whenever they get around to seeing you. And it won’t be at night, on a weekend or holiday.

7

[QUOTE=Loach]
Please tell me where you got this information. I am not an expert in “most states”. I can only tell you about New Jersey. The out of state orders I have seen all look the same as NJ but I can’t recall exactly which ones I have seen over the years so I won’t argue about them. New Jersey has just about the strongest laws regarding restraining orders in the country. For instance in NJ final restraining orders have no expiration date. However, a restraining order is not automatically mutual. In NJ it is definately not mutual. That is one of the first things I tell someone I am serving. I have seen it many times. The girlfriend calls and things get patched up. Pretty soon she is tired of his shit again and she calls and says he is in violation, come and arrest him. She did nothing to break the law. The RO is one way. He would have to file his own RO if he wanted one.

As for the OP, our ROs don’t have a specific distance to stay away. It lists many restrictions. Prohibited from the residence, prohibited to make any contact (written, oral, electronic), prohibited from going to the plaintiffs place of business, prohibited from having others contact the plaintiff etc… If the two happen to bump into each other in public the defendant is required to leave. A coincidence will not be a violation. If he happens to do it multiple times then it runs into the prohibited from stalking part of the RO. The defendant is obligated to leave, even in a theater, even in a restaurant. The plaintiff does not have a RO against her, she has no obligation to leave.

In NJ all violations of ROs are on no bail warrants. You go to jail, do not pass GO. That is because the order is approved at the Superior Court level. A municipal court judge can not set bail. To get out of jail you have to go before a Superior Court judge. Whenever they get around to seeing you. And it won’t be at night, on a weekend or holiday.
[/QUOTE]

I usually over-react when I read about the law. Hopefully I am doing so here. If the person who is protected by the RO tracks down the subject of the RO and approaches, the subject of the RO is subject to arrest? Say the subject doesn’t know the protected person is there or for some external reason can’t leave. Is that person still subject to arrest? It seems pretty draconian to give such power to a person.

8

[QUOTE=rbroome]
I usually over-react when I read about the law. Hopefully I am doing so here. If the person who is protected by the RO tracks down the subject of the RO and approaches, the subject of the RO is subject to arrest? Say the subject doesn’t know the protected person is there or for some external reason can’t leave. Is that person still subject to arrest? It seems pretty draconian to give such power to a person.
[/QUOTE]

Ditto. I was reading what Loach wrote and thought “That can’t be right!” (I am sure it is though) To me it seems like it is just too open to abuse by the protected party. I understand that the non-protected party (NPP) could just fill their own order out but it seems to be an unneeded step. Why would be the harm in making it two-way? There has to be limits on this correct? What is to keep the protected party from harrassing? Could they move into the house next to the NPP and force them to move? Get a job at their company and force them to quit? What if the protected party worked at a hospital, would the NPP be unable to get emergency medical without being arrested? The mind boggles.

9

I’m under one of these things at the moment (have been for ages - the ex just keeps renewing, and I don’t have the money to waste on fighting it).

My one does not specify a distance (as we were living under the same roof when she filed. Worked together too, actually).

As my lawyer said: “this document says you can’t threaten/harrass/stalk/etc her. Guess what? You can’t do those things to me either. It’s telling you you can’t do things which are illegal anyway. But the magistrates almost never deny one of these things because, in their experience they know a lot of them are bogus and vexatious, but just on the off chance that they did deny it, and you did harrass her, it looks pretty bad for the magistrate.”

10

Again I’ll say that I can only speak about NJ law although I know that many states are similar. I certainly can’t give any information about Australia or other countries.

In New Jersey restraining orders are for domestic violence only. Although all the statutes which fall under DV are not violent acts (such as harrassment). You can only receive a RO against someone you have had a dating relationship with, married to or cohabitated (that can include roomates, adult siblings). People ask for ROs against their neighbors all the time and we have to tell them it can’t be done.

There are basically two types of restraining orders, the temporary restraining order and the final restraining order. The TRO tends to be a bit harsher just due to circumstances. A TRO can be granted by a local judge on behalf of the Superior Court in emergent circumstances. That usually means there has been an assault or other serious incident. We have to entertain all DV request for TROs, even if we (the police) think they are frivolous. The judge is contacted by phone and he determines if there is reason for a TRO. Although they tend to err on the side of caution I have seen plenty turned down. If there is no emergent circumstances the plaintiff is told to go to the Superior Court during business hours.

A TRO is very basic and harsh. There is no visitation. There is no contact. There is no consideration for anything that might be a problem for the defendant. He doesn’t get a say. However this is just temporary. They are only in effect for about 10 days until both parties have a hearing with the judge. At that time things are worked out. The TRO is either dropped, extended, modified or a final order is placed. Within that 10 day period the defendant can also appeal and the TRO may be dropped at that time.

A FRO is what has provisions for things like child visitation and custody, working together, living near each other. If circumstances change, like the plaintiff moves next door to the defendant, the order can be modified. If the plaintiff harasses the defendant then they can get a RO against the other party. The FRO has no expiration date. NJ and I think Michigan are the only states that don’t have expiration dates on FROs. In all other states the plaintiff has to renew the FRO.

11

Wanted to edit for this but ran out of time:

One other thing that might be important to someone. A RO is a civil order, not a criminal matter. No conviction is needed. Criminal charges may not even be filed along with the RO. Since it is a civil matter there is no beyond a reasonable doubt standard of proof. Violating a RO falls under civil contempt of a Superior Court judge’s order.

12

So, Loach, if you have an RO against me (in NJ), then you show up at a restaurant I’m already eating at, do I have to leave the restaraunt and you get to stay?
I’m unclear on this type of situation, sorry.

It seems a fairly common thing for someone to get a reactionary RO against the first person, but without it is the person protected allowed to initiate contact and then report a violation?

13

[QUOTE=garygnu]
So, Loach, if you have an RO against me (in NJ), then you show up at a restaurant I’m already eating at, do I have to leave the restaraunt and you get to stay?
I’m unclear on this type of situation, sorry.

It seems a fairly common thing for someone to get a reactionary RO against the first person, but without it is the person protected allowed to initiate contact and then report a violation?
[/QUOTE]

Especially under a TRO the defendant has the obligation to not be where the plaintiff is. He has to leave. Under a FRO the judge may set parameters for the parties to interact. Or he may not. The plaintiff can initiate any contact they want. There is no RO against them. It is up to the defendant to not speak, respond to texts or letters and certainly to not go over when invited. There is no such thing as a mutual RO and the defendant also has to show cause to a judge for why he also wants a RO. “Because she got one on me,” is not cause.

14

[QUOTE=jtgain]
It depends on the state, but in most states, restraining orders are mutual regardless of who filed.
[/QUOTE]

Not in any jurisdiction that I’m familiar with:

California: http://www.berkeleyfamilylawyer.com/CaliforniaFamilyLawNewsRestrainingOrderPrimer.html

Michigan: http://courts.michigan.gov/scao/courtforms/personalprotectionorders/cc376.pdf

New Jersey:

[QUOTE=garygnu]
So, Loach, if you have an RO against me (in NJ), then you show up at a restaurant I’m already eating at, do I have to leave the restaraunt and you get to stay?
[/QUOTE]

Take a look at the Michigan form. It gets pretty specific about what is and is not allowed.

15

[QUOTE=Gfactor]
Not in any jurisdiction that I’m familiar with:

California: http://www.berkeleyfamilylawyer.com/CaliforniaFamilyLawNewsRestrainingOrderPrimer.html

Michigan: http://courts.michigan.gov/scao/courtforms/personalprotectionorders/cc376.pdf

New Jersey: http://www.state.nj.us/lps/dcj/agguide/9dvout0.pdf

Take a look at the Michigan form. It gets pretty specific about what is and is not allowed.
[/QUOTE]

You and your cites. How the hell do you navigate through the NJ state website? I usually quit in frustration after about a minute.

16

[QUOTE=Loach]
You and your cites. How the hell do you navigate through the NJ state website? I usually quit in frustration after about a minute.
[/QUOTE]

Actually, I almost never bother with state websites, unless I’ve got a pretty good idea where to look. And I do research in 14 states on a regulary basis.* I found the New Jersey thing through Google. I still have not located a New Jersey form.

*For example, this week I needed to find a proposed mortgage regulation from Ohio because the regulators sent us a questionnaire that required an answer using a definition from the proposed rule. I checked the official place (the state administrative register) and found nothing. I checked the semi-official place (the regulator’s website) and found nothing. Finally, I googled the citation for the rule and found the proposed rules on a law firm website. Of course, the proposed rules omitted the one that the questionnaire referenced. **That ** required a call to the regulator. The person left me a voicemail that said, “oh yeah, we cut that rule before we went final on the proposal. But we still want you to use the definition. I’ll email it to you.” :smack:

17

[QUOTE=Gfactor]
Actually, I almost never bother with state websites, unless I’ve got a pretty good idea where to look. And I do research in 14 states on a regulary basis.* I found the New Jersey thing through Google. I still have not located a New Jersey form.

[/QUOTE]

Usually when I search NJ laws to give a cite I get this guy’s website. I deal with him from time to time. Sometimes you can get to the statute directly from a search. If you try to use the search function on the state site it never directs you to the right statute. I think it is a plot so that people have to hire lawyers just to look up the law. I just tried the NJ site and it crashed Internet Explorer.

18

[QUOTE=AskNott]
They work darned poorly, in practice.
One guy I knew, on advice of his lawyer, refused to let her get near him without a sheriff’s deputy present. Divorce seems to make some people do crazy stuff.
[/QUOTE]

We have a half-time employee going through a nasty divorce. As an employer, I find her to be pretty darn good. She’s 50+, always on time, good customer presentation. At 5’ 2" or so, 120 lbs I’d guess, not a physical threat.

Her husband got a RO against her. (Disclaimer that I probably don’t have the full story). One of her teen daughters calls her, asking her to come over. She does, husband calls the cops.

She now has a Domestic Violence conviction on her record, for violating the terms of the RO. Can this be correct?

Doug

19

[QUOTE=retusaf99]
We have a half-time employee going through a nasty divorce. As an employer, I find her to be pretty darn good. She’s 50+, always on time, good customer presentation. At 5’ 2" or so, 120 lbs I’d guess, not a physical threat.

Her husband got a RO against her. (Disclaimer that I probably don’t have the full story). One of her teen daughters calls her, asking her to come over. She does, husband calls the cops.

She now has a Domestic Violence conviction on her record, for violating the terms of the RO. Can this be correct?

Doug
[/QUOTE]

I have no idea about Washington. In New Jersey, if convicted, she would be convicted of civil contempt. That is contempt of a judges order. It is separate from domestic violence but related. The RO is a civil order, not a criminal matter. But contempt of that order is a crime.

20

[QUOTE=Loach]
I have no idea about Washington. In New Jersey, if convicted, she would be convicted of civil contempt. That is contempt of a judges order. It is separate from domestic violence but related. The RO is a civil order, not a criminal matter. But contempt of that order is a crime.
[/QUOTE]

Thank you, Loach.

I’m new here, but appreciate your prompt response.

Guess my only comment is to anyone contemplating what might be considered domestic violence:

DON’T DO IT!!

It will mess up the rest of your life. I thought I could give this lady some sage advice, but the “system” has her hosed. (Think about finding a full-time job as a 50 something stay-at-home-mom…)

Doug