Owens

DISCUSSION

Owens contends the trial court erred by dissolving the temporary restraining order and dismissing her petition after she failed to appear at the hearing. No error has been shown. “‘We review an appeal from an order denying a request to renew a domestic violence restraining order for abuse of discretion.’” (In re Marriage of Martindale & Ochoa (2018) 30 Cal.App.5th 54, 59.) Likewise, the “denial of a permanent injunction . . . will not be disturbed on appeal absent a showing of a clear abuse of discretion. . . . ‘[T]o the extent the trial court had to review the evidence to resolve disputed factual issues, and draw inferences from the presented facts, [we] review such factual findings under a substantial evidence standard.’” (Horsford v. Board of Trustees of California State University (2005) 132 Cal.App.4th 359, 390.) The TRO expired at the end of the hearing on August 6. A party seeking to extend a TRO has the burden to establish that they still have “a ‘reasonable apprehension’ of future abuse.” (Ritchie v. Konrad (2004) 115 Cal.App.4th 1275, 1290.) The only record of the August 6 hearing is the minute order. It does not state that the court’s order was based on

2…