How to Appeal Dismissal With Prejudice of a DV Restraining Order

[undrdog]

My question involves restraining orders in the State of: CA

Judge ordered a dismissal with prejudice. Can this be appealed? If so, how?

Also, I understand I cannot file again, but does that mean for anything or just that particular incident the TRO was written?

[Mr. Knowitall]

Dismissal with prejudice means that the specific case is over.

If new facts arise, they may justify a new petition.

Given that the judge found it appropriate to issue a dismissal with prejudice, I suspect that it would be a very good idea to be represented by counsel if you try to obtain an order against the same person in the future.

[undrdog]

Dismissal with prejudice means that the specific case is over.

If new facts arise, they may justify a new petition.

Given that the judge found it appropriate to issue a dismissal with prejudice, I suspect that it would be a very good idea to be represented by counsel if you try to obtain an order against the same person in the future.

I found I could possibly file for a vacate of judgement and/or appeals.

Something went wrong. I was the plaintiff in a DV case and I did not present my case first or given opportunity to ask questions as a plaintiff is supposed to. The judge kept directing such to the defendant and instead I was questioned mostly about civil matters rather than the case at hand. Somehow I ended up on the defense and it is the plaintiff who has the burden of proof. The defendant used civil merits to justify his defense in a domestic violence case.

Mind you, the defendant was arrested and charged with felony DV and felony and misdemeanor drug charges so how is it a false report when the sheriff's had enough to charge him? This guy's lawyer objected to as hearsay and the judge allowed it to be struck down as evidence.

The original hearing for my case against him I had "discovery" papers, but because someone vandalized my car that morning I lost the time to make copies to hand over to the guy's lawyer prior to court being in session. The judge offered a continuance and ordered me to file these papers with the court. These papers were not meant for filing to begin with. They were additional evidence in respects to the guy's response to the RO against him. The very first thing the judge addressed was the filing he ordered me to do saying it was irrelevant, but it was so, given the defendant's response was irrelevant, but also ladden with perjury. How did this get turned against me? I wonder if the judge mistaken me as a defendant rather than the plaintiff on the day of the continuance?

Now, with his DV TRO on me, I am on the defense this time. He based the DV TRO against me on an alleged threat that I told him I'd call the cops if he came home and that I filed a false DV report to have him arrested and kicked out. There is not any evidence with the orders to back his claim of a threat and I can refute the false report allegations in my response to his RO against me.

Prior to these orders served on me, but after the hearing this guy's lawyer handed me a letter demanding I vacate the residence immediately. I quickly went home to board my pet somewhere safe knowing he was allowed back. One of this guy's friends came knocking at the door with a video camera demanding I give him keys for the guy and said the sheriff's were on their way. I'm worried this video tape will be edited to fit justification to his otherwise baseless complaint against me.

The sheriff's arrived and ordered me outside while other officers did a walk through the residence with the guy who had the camera. Once I found the letter from the lawyer and showed it to one of the officers, she said it was not good enough for them to remove me and informed him he had to evict me through the court. Several hours later I was served with a DV TRO and ousted out immediately.

That hearing is next month and after the deed gets transferred in regards to a foreclosure on the property. This worries me, because he has to vacate the property, before I can retrieve the rest of my belongings. I'm afraid of my stuff being thrown out by the new owner or the bank or by him and he could lie saying someone else did.

So that is the gist of what's going on now. Lovely, ey? Not!!

[AZDeputyClerk]

Well, in regards to the discovery papers, the judge was correct in barring them. Any pleading, motion, etc. must be filed and served on the other party. As for the hearing, the party requesting the hearing gets to present their case first and the judge generally asks the questions. The judge may then decide whether they need to question the other party.

[undrdog]

Well, in regards to the discovery papers, the judge was correct in barring them. Any pleading, motion, etc. must be filed and served on the other party. As for the hearing, the party requesting the hearing gets to present their case first and the judge generally asks the questions. The judge may then decide whether they need to question the other party.

In the beginning, right before court is in session, the bailiff mentions any additional evidence to be swapped with the other party. These are not papers filed and served and that's what those papers were meant as. The judge mentioned their irrelevancy, but they were so, because the guy's response was irrelevant and meant to refute the guy's response and point out perjury in case it came up.

The judge began the hearing with these papers rather than the case at hand, which was not mentioned at all. The case at hand was when this guy attacked me. The papers he began with were to refute the defendant's statements of being sole owner of the property I reside and denying me as a tenant. That was his response to the TRO on him, so I armed myself with some documents to show otherwise.

Now, he has a DV TRO on me without any evidence to base allegations I threatened to call sheriff's if he tried coming home and accuses me of filing a false DV complaint. It seems he is using the dismissal with prejudice against me and names the judge as a witness (under "who was there?" on the TRO request form). I do not have much of a desire to return, but I do want to get my stuff out before the foreclosing auction and it would help to have the time law allows a tenant to seek residence elsewhere...and the employment needed to support it.

This guy was my boss and he denies up to 12 years of work experience. I now have documentation to use as a reference rather than naming him, but it will take time. In his response and talking to those involved with the police case, it became apparent he defamed my reputation, so I can only imagine what he's done to me within the industry and potential hires. I may need to make a sudden change into a different industry to have a chance. We're talking walking away from a 25 year field of expertise.