1 of 15 DOCUMENTS ANNOTATED LAWS OF MASSACHUSETTS ...

ALM GL ch. 209A, § 3
Page 26
c 261, § 14 did not authorize the District Court judge to levy costs against the Commissioner due to the Commissioner's
failure to attend a hearing on a motion to destroy all copies of the ALM GL c 209A order. Comm'r of Prob. v. Adams
(2006) 65 Mass App 725, 843 NE2d 1101, 2006 Mass App LEXIS 262.
Appellate Division of District Court Department lacks subject matter jurisdiction to review ALM GL c 209A cases
in District Courts. Burrill v. Burrill (1993) 1993 Mass App Div 178, 1993 Mass App Div LEXIS 63.
No error occurred when a district court extended an abuse protection order, which a girlfriend had obtained on an
emergency basis against her boyfriend's son, pursuant to ALM GL c 209A, § 3 (as amended by 1983 Mass. Acts ch. 678,
§ 4). The son had lived with them in the same house for two years, he kept a kept a key to the house after he moved out,
he continued to receive his mail and to take showers there, he came and left without making prior arrangements, and on
several occasions when he entered without permission, he had shoved and threatened her and her children; the son thus
fit the definition of a "former household member" that was contained in ALM GL c 209A, § 1 (as inserted by 1990 Mass.
Acts ch. 403, § 2). Aguilar v. Hernandez-Mendez (2006) 66 Mass App 367, 848 NE2d 779, 2006 Mass App LEXIS 567.
In issuing and extending for a year an abuse protection order pursuant to ALM GL c 209A, § 3 (as amended by 1983
Mass. Acts ch. 678, § 4) against a son on the petition of a girlfriend, who was the girlfriend of the son's father, a district
court did not abuse its discretion; the son fit within the definition of a "former household member" under ALM GL c
209A, § 1 (as inserted by 1990 Mass. Acts ch. 403, § 2), as he had lived with them for two years and had kept a key and
had continued to use their home after he moved out. The legislature had consistently amended the statute since its
inception in 1978 and had consistently expanded the definition of a "family or household member" in § 1, the legislature
had drafted the statute with a purposeful flexibility, the categories of persons covered under the statute had been
continually expanded, and a broad and flexible interpretation was appropriate. Aguilar v. Hernandez-Mendez (2006) 66
Mass App 367, 848 NE2d 779, 2006 Mass App LEXIS 567.
Where a mother stated in her affidavit in support of a ALM GL c 209A abuse prevention order that defendant, her
husband, had punched her son, but testified at the assault and battery trial that defendant had accidently struck her son,
pursuant to Commonwealth v. Daye, 393 Mass. 55, 469 NE2d 483, 1984 Mass LEXIS 1737 (1984), the trial court
properly allowed the affidavit to be used as substantive evidence. Commonwealth v Belmer (2010) 78 Mass App 62,
935 NE2d 327, 2010 Mass. App. LEXIS 1320.
Trial court impermissibly prevented plaintiff from calling defendant as a witness at the hearing on an application
for a ALM GL c 209A abuse prevention order because defendant never asserted a privilege not to testify, and trial court
did not inquire if defendant chose to do so; it was not the trial court's prerogative to make that choice for him. S.T. v.
E.M. (2011) 2011 Mass. App. LEXIS 1192.
In a case in which defendant appealed the extension of an abuse prevention order, defendant waived any due
process objection to the procedure followed by the judge. Defense counsel actively participated in requesting, and
crafting the scope of, the out-of-court inquiry that the judge undertook, and defense counsel never mentioned due
process, either before or after the judge obtained a police sergeant's statements. Diaz v. Gomez (2012) 82 Mass App 55,
2012 Mass. App. LEXIS 209.
In a case in which defendant appealed the extension of an abuse prevention order, he unsuccessfully argued that the
evidence was insufficient to support the judge's finding by a preponderance of the evidence that his former spouse was
reasonably in fear of imminent physical harm. The judge found credible the former spouse's testimony that defendant
previously put a gun to her head and threatened to kill her if she left him, and neither that finding, nor any of the others
made by the judge, was clearly erroneous. Diaz v. Gomez (2012) 82 Mass App 55, 2012 Mass. App. LEXIS 209.
Under ALM GL c 209A, household members, including petitioner's stepdaughter who resided with him, are
protected from domestic abuse; thus, petitioner's conviction for indecent assault and battery under ALM GL c 265, §
13H satisfied second prong of 8 USCS § 1227(a)(2)(E)(i), notwithstanding that stepdaughter never obtained protective