StacyInCalif
Junior Member
What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? CA
I'll make this brief. Filed for a temporary restraining order against someone for civil harassment (long involved case, these people are scary, have threatened violence and physical attacks against myself and my teenage daughter, I have proof of such printed and in my possession), was given ex parte hearing date, was told to have "anyone over the age of 18 not a party to the action" call them the night before the hearing, and fill out/sign the declaration form given to me by the court.
Ex parte hearing was this morning ~ had a friend of my husband call them yesterday evening at shortly after 9 pm, he filled out the declaration and I attended the hearing today. They apparently called some attorney (I know of him, not a good reputation and has an attorney discipline record...which is only relevant in that he is just the sort of lawyer I'd expect people like this to hire), who called the court saying he was still in bed (!) but on his way down to the courthouse to represent these people.
Now, as the judge calls the case, I am fully prepared with loads of documentation and evidence, and ready to state my case. Judge asks about notice, which I inform him that there should be an ex parte declaration included, which he finds. The attorney they hired objects on grounds of lack of notice. Judge upholds the objection and decides he has no jurisdiction to order any TRO or set any additional hearing AT ALL in this matter.
These folks have been stalking and harassing myself, my family (they even called my mother in another state, how they got her number I have no idea, to harass her about me), my landlady and so forth for months now. They had an attorney (different one) send a letter to my landlady's address (which I have no idea how they found, either, as it is NOT online anywhere nor in the phone book) threatening all sorts of bogus legal action and demanding that I send a letter directly to these people themselves. As they sought (and were granted, though how THAT works I have no idea) a TRO against ME for doing exactly what THEY are doing to me. Sending such a letter would be a violation of their TRO.
This is also the reason why neither I nor my husband (whom for some unknown reason is also named on their TRO request) wanted to make the ex parte notice call. I was told this morning by the judge that it is I who should have called them and that I had to give them "proper notice".
So, to make a long story even longer, I went back to the Civil Department and asked about what "proper notice" in an ex parte harassment hearing case was. FOUR HOURS before the hearing is to take place is what I was told. As they were notified almost twelve hours before the hearing, I would assume such to have been PROPER notice.
My question, after all that: Can I appeal this denial of my restraining order and get one in place before these people harm myself or my daughter (as they have threatened to do)?? Or am I just out of luck?
I'll make this brief. Filed for a temporary restraining order against someone for civil harassment (long involved case, these people are scary, have threatened violence and physical attacks against myself and my teenage daughter, I have proof of such printed and in my possession), was given ex parte hearing date, was told to have "anyone over the age of 18 not a party to the action" call them the night before the hearing, and fill out/sign the declaration form given to me by the court.
Ex parte hearing was this morning ~ had a friend of my husband call them yesterday evening at shortly after 9 pm, he filled out the declaration and I attended the hearing today. They apparently called some attorney (I know of him, not a good reputation and has an attorney discipline record...which is only relevant in that he is just the sort of lawyer I'd expect people like this to hire), who called the court saying he was still in bed (!) but on his way down to the courthouse to represent these people.
Now, as the judge calls the case, I am fully prepared with loads of documentation and evidence, and ready to state my case. Judge asks about notice, which I inform him that there should be an ex parte declaration included, which he finds. The attorney they hired objects on grounds of lack of notice. Judge upholds the objection and decides he has no jurisdiction to order any TRO or set any additional hearing AT ALL in this matter.
These folks have been stalking and harassing myself, my family (they even called my mother in another state, how they got her number I have no idea, to harass her about me), my landlady and so forth for months now. They had an attorney (different one) send a letter to my landlady's address (which I have no idea how they found, either, as it is NOT online anywhere nor in the phone book) threatening all sorts of bogus legal action and demanding that I send a letter directly to these people themselves. As they sought (and were granted, though how THAT works I have no idea) a TRO against ME for doing exactly what THEY are doing to me. Sending such a letter would be a violation of their TRO.
This is also the reason why neither I nor my husband (whom for some unknown reason is also named on their TRO request) wanted to make the ex parte notice call. I was told this morning by the judge that it is I who should have called them and that I had to give them "proper notice".
So, to make a long story even longer, I went back to the Civil Department and asked about what "proper notice" in an ex parte harassment hearing case was. FOUR HOURS before the hearing is to take place is what I was told. As they were notified almost twelve hours before the hearing, I would assume such to have been PROPER notice.
My question, after all that: Can I appeal this denial of my restraining order and get one in place before these people harm myself or my daughter (as they have threatened to do)?? Or am I just out of luck?
, denials of applications for restraining orders are appealable (generally they are based on a judge's abuse of discretion). In your situation, it sounds as if the denial was based on improper notice.