1 of 15 DOCUMENTS ANNOTATED LAWS OF MASSACHUSETTS ...

ALM GL ch. 209A, § 1
Page 6
apply the four factors provided by ALM GL c 209A, § 1(e)(1)-(4) in determining whether a substantive dating
relationship existed, and the trial court erred in refusing to allow the boy to present evidence and cross examine
witnesses at the hearing in question. C.O. v. M.M. (2004) 442 Mass 648, 815 NE2d 582, 2004 Mass LEXIS 665.
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 plaintiff lived with her mother and mother's husband for ten years in same household until mother and her
husband were divorced, plaintiff and former husband "resided in same household" and "were related . . . by marriage" as
stepfather and stepdaughter within meaning of ALM GL c 209A, § 1(b) and (c). Sorgman v. Sorgman (2000) 49 Mass
App 416, 729 NE2d 1141, 2000 Mass App LEXIS 470.
There is no time limitation on application of ALM GL c 209A, §§ 1 and 3, so that stepdaughter who last lived with
stepfather in same household in 1977, but who continued to have contact and involvement with stepfather, was not
precluded from seeking protective order under ALM GL c 209A. Sorgman v. Sorgman (2000) 49 Mass App 416, 729
NE2d 1141, 2000 Mass App LEXIS 470.
ALM GL c 209A attempts to remedy violence among family or household members; the proceedings are civil in
nature, and the appellate court accords the trial judge's findings great deference prescribed by Mass. R. Civ. P. 52(a),
which may be supplemented by inspection of the transcript. Szymkowski v. Szymkowski (2003) 57 Mass App 284, 782
NE2d 1085, 2003 Mass App LEXIS 164.
Appellate court reads conflicting evidence in an ALM GL c 209A proceeding granting relief to the plaintiff in the
light most favorable to the plaintiff. Szymkowski v. Szymkowski (2003) 57 Mass App 284, 782 NE2d 1085, 2003 Mass
App LEXIS 164.
Court should not issue an ALM GL c 209A order simply because it seems to be a good idea or because it seems it
will not cause the defendant any real inconvenience as a ALM GL c 209A order will infallibly cause inconvenience; in
considering whether to issue a ALM GL c 209A order, the judge must focus on whether serious physical harm is
imminent, and a generalized apprehension does not rise to the level of fear of imminent serious physical harm.
Szymkowski v. Szymkowski (2003) 57 Mass App 284, 782 NE2d 1085, 2003 Mass App LEXIS 164.
In considering an application for an ALM GL c 209A order, a judge must be alert against allowing the process to be
used, as it sometimes is, abusively by litigants for purposes of discovery and harassment. Szymkowski v. Szymkowski
(2003) 57 Mass App 284, 782 NE2d 1085, 2003 Mass App LEXIS 164.
Although the judge is entitled to reject the ultimate evaluation of a Department of Social Services social worker, a
judge, in the exercise of discretion, may consider the factual content of reports as to an investigation into charges of
abuse and neglect into account in an ALM GL c 209A proceeding. Szymkowski v. Szymkowski (2003) 57 Mass App
284, 782 NE2d 1085, 2003 Mass App LEXIS 164.
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.
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,