ButterTart
VIP Member
It makes sense because if you have a DVRO against you it makes it tougher to negotiate things like visitation (given that the restrained person can't go near the protected person, making child handovers more complex, for example). And if convicted, it definitely has an impact on share of custody and potentially support, among other things. So I can see why an aggrieved spouse might want to use an RO as basically a cudgel on the ex, even if the circumstances don't warrant it.I was listening to a podcast yesterday with an LA lawyer discussing restraining orders. He said that with family law cases, judges are usually reluctant to issue ROs until a full hearing, because too often RO applications are used by one parent to prevent the other parent having contact with their child.
I don’t know whether @ButterTart is able to confirm/correct this?
I think a judge getting up to speed on this case would see the years of acrimony, the various filings (including Alice's communications to Ioan where she basically predicted exactly what she was going to and has threatened to do), and the steps he took to protect himself, Bianca and the girls (chaperones, therapy, etc.)