M.M.

M.M. v. S.T. CA3

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaApril 4, 2022C093429California1,031 words

Opinion

Opinion

DISCUSSION

I Sufficient Evidence Supports The Civil Harassment Restraining Order Defendant appears to contend insufficient evidence supports the civil harassment restraining order. Based on the limited record, we cannot agree. Section 527.6 authorizes a person who has suffered harassment to obtain an injunction against the harassing conduct. A trial court shall issue a civil harassment restraining order if, after a hearing, it finds by clear and convincing evidence that unlawful harassment exists. (§ 527.6.) We review issuance of a civil harassment restraining order for abuse of discretion, and the factual findings necessary to support the

2 protective order for substantial evidence. (Parisi v. Mazzaferro (2016) 5 Cal.App.5th 1219, 1226, disapproved on other grounds in Conservatorship of O.B. (2020) 9 Cal.5th 989, 1010, fn. 7.) “It is well settled . . . that a party challenging a judgment has the burden of showing reversible error by an adequate record.” (Ballard v. Uribe (1986) 41 Cal.3d 564, 574.) If a defendant “intends to raise any issue that requires consideration of the oral proceedings in the superior court,” he, she, or they has the burden to provide a record of such…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.