N.B. VS. S.K. A-0898-12T4/A-0899-12T4(CONSOLIDATED)
In 2002,
plaintiff obtained a domestic violence final restraining order (FRO)
against her husband, but agreed in 2003 to its vacation when the parties
settled their matrimonial disputes; they then agreed to replace their
respective FROs with mutual restraints in the divorce action. In 2012,
after years during which the matrimonial restraints proved ineffectual
in preventing defendant from attempting to communicate with plaintiff,
plaintiff filed a domestic violence action alleging harassment when
defendant repeatedly called a telephone that the matrimonial restraints
barred him from calling. The trial judge excluded plaintiff's evidence
of defendant's prior failures to comply with the matrimonial restraints
and granted an involuntary dismissal on the ground that a violation of a
matrimonial order cannot constitute an act of domestic violence. The
court reversed, holding that defendant's past violations of the
matrimonial restraints were relevant in that they provided an
understanding of why plaintiff would be alarmed or seriously annoyed by
what otherwise seemed to be innocuous communications.
In the separate but related appeal, the court affirmed the denial of plaintiff's subsequent motion to vacate the 2003 order, which vacated the original FRO, solely because plaintiff failed to seek relief within a reasonable period of time. 03/24/14 December 8, 2015
N.B. VS. S.K. A-0898-12T4/A-0899-12T4(CONSOLIDATED)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment