Herriott

INTRODUCTION

A divorced, elderly couple-Paul and Alicja-continued to reside in the same building after dissolving their marriage. 1 Since then, the former spouses have a documented history of legal actions, complaints, and issues against one another. Each requested a restraining order against the other in connection with overlapping events and/or incidents. After concluding trial on both parties' requests for restraining orders, the trial court granted both, with certain modifications.

Paul, in propria persona, appeals from the restraining order issued against him, and argues the trial court erred in granting same. He also appeals from the restraining order issued against Alicja arguing the trial court incorrectly interpreted the relevant statute 2 in rendering its decision. And finally, Paul argues the court failed to make the required detailed finding of fact as to who-Paul or Alicja-was the "primary aggressor" in the dispute after issuing what Paul argues were mutual *758 restraining orders. We disagree with all three of Paul's positions.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

A. Relevant Background Information

We rely on the record provided to piece together and summarize the…