1 of 15 DOCUMENTS ANNOTATED LAWS OF MASSACHUSETTS ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

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
ALM GL ch. 209A, § 3 Page 27 order under ALM GL c 209A. Sutherland v. Reno (2000) 228 F3d 171, 2000 US App LEXIS 23363. General protection for household members under ALM GL c 209A applies regardless of whether they avail themselves of protective orders. Sutherland v. Reno (2000) 228 F3d 171, 2000 US App LEXIS 23363. Petitioner's convicted offense of indecent assault and battery on person over age of 14 ( ALM GL c 265, § 13H) was both (1) "crime of violence" under 18 USCS § 16(b) because it involved substantial risk that physical force may have been used, and (2) crime committed against person protected by domestic or family violence laws of Massachusetts. Sutherland v. Reno (2000) 228 F3d 171, 2000 US App LEXIS 23363. Because the trial court made no specific findings and conclusions of law, the supreme judicial court was unable to determine the standard that was applied in denying a girlfriend's motion to extend a protective order under ALM GL c 209A, § 3; the trial court's sua sponte vacation of the original ALM GL c 209A, § 1 order was error because the only issue before it was whether the order should be extended. Iamele v. Asselin (2005) 444 Mass 734, 831 NE2d 324, 2005 Mass LEXIS 421. Where the trial judge found that abuse had not occurred but the trial judge extended abuse prevention orders to keep plaintiff and the fiance apart pending resolution of a property dispute, the trial judge erred; where abuse under ALM GL c 209A, § 1 had not occurred, the remedies under ALM GL c 209A, § 3 were unavailable. Corrado v. Hedrick (2006) 65 Mass App 477, 841 NE2d 723, 2006 Mass App LEXIS 80.
Page 1 and 2: Page 1 1 of 15 DOCUMENTS ANNOTATED
Page 3 and 4: ALM GL ch. 209A, § 1 Page 3 Sectio
Page 5 and 6: ALM GL ch. 209A, § 1 Page 5 Cokler
Page 7 and 8: ALM GL ch. 209A, § 1 Page 7 he con
Page 9 and 10: ALM GL ch. 209A, § 1 Page 9 Common
Page 11 and 12: ALM GL ch. 209A, § 2 Page 11 Treat
Page 15 and 16: ALM GL ch. 209A, § 3 Page 15 (i) t
Page 17 and 18: ALM GL ch. 209A, § 3 Page 17 The 2
Page 19 and 20: ALM GL ch. 209A, § 3 Page 19 of Do
Page 21 and 22: ALM GL ch. 209A, § 3 Page 21 resul
Page 23 and 24: ALM GL ch. 209A, § 3 Page 23 Past
Page 25: ALM GL ch. 209A, § 3 Page 25 797 N
Page 29 and 30: ALM GL ch. 209A, § 3A Page 29 ABA
Page 31 and 32: ALM GL ch. 209A, § 3B Page 31 for
Page 37 and 38: ALM GL ch. 209A, § 4 Page 37 Brisk
Page 41 and 42: ALM GL ch. 209A, § 5 Page 41 only
Page 45 and 46: Page 45 10 of 15 DOCUMENTS ANNOTATE
Page 47 and 48: ALM GL ch. 209A, § 6 Page 47 Whene
Page 49 and 50: ALM GL ch. 209A, § 6 Page 49 Const
Page 53 and 54: ALM GL ch. 209A, § 7 Page 53 shelt
Page 55 and 56: ALM GL ch. 209A, § 7 Page 55 Massa
Page 57 and 58: ALM GL ch. 209A, § 7 Page 57 did n
Page 59 and 60: ALM GL ch. 209A, § 7 Page 59 "voic
Page 61 and 62: ALM GL ch. 209A, § 7 Page 61 conte
Page 63 and 64: ALM GL ch. 209A, § 7 Page 63 Given
Page 65 and 66: ALM GL ch. 209A, § 8 Page 65 The 1
Page 67 and 68: Page 67 § 9. Form of Complaint. 13
Page 92 and 93:
Page 1 § 1. Definitions. 1 of 12 D
Page 94 and 95:
Page 3 § 2. Jurisdiction. 2 of 12
Page 96 and 97:
ALM GL ch. 258E, § 3 Page 5 until
Page 98 and 99:
Page 7 § 4. Nature of Complaint. 4
Page 100 and 101:
Page 9 6 of 12 DOCUMENTS ANNOTATED
Page 102 and 103:
Page 11 7 of 12 DOCUMENTS ANNOTATED
Page 104 and 105:
ALM GL ch. 258E, § 8 Page 13 appli
Page 106 and 107:
Page 15 § 9. Review of Records. 9
Page 108 and 109:
Page 17 10 of 12 DOCUMENTS ANNOTATE
Page 110 and 111:
Page 19 § 12. Assessment Fee. 12 o
Page 112 and 113:
ALM GL ch. 269, § 17 Page 2 68 Am
Page 114 and 115:
ALM GL ch. 269, § 18 Page 4 Edelma
Page 116 and 117:
ALM GL ch. 266, § 126A Page 2 The
Page 118:
ALM GL ch. 266, § 126B Page 4 Mass
show all

1 of 15 DOCUMENTS ANNOTATED LAWS OF MASSACHUSETTS ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?