Case Result: Harassment Restraining Order

Earl's client was being harassed by his soon-to-be ex-wife. Due to the circumstances of their relationship, Earl drafted a petition for a Harassment Restraining Order (HRO) to protect his client. Based on the conduct stated in the petition, the court granted Earl's request for an HRO.

Earl's client's wife requested a hearing to contest the HRO. While preparing for the hearing, Earl was informed of a video that was recorded by his client's friend that showed the wife harassing his client at an event they all attended. The wife did not know this video existed.

Having dealt with the wife in prior proceedings, Earl had a feeling she would not own up to the conduct if questioned about it. Earl went to work researching the rules and procedures for getting this video before the judge to show not only that his client was being harassed, but also that the wife was willing to lie about it.

At the hearing, Earl questioned the wife about what happened at the event. As expected, the wife, under oath, told a different story than what was captured on the video. Earl introduced the video to the court by calling his client's friend to testify about the video he recorded.

Based on the evidence presented and the testimony during the hearing, the court not only upheld Earl's HRO, but increased the distance that his client's wife had to stay away from him, up from 20 feet to 300 feet.