1 of 15 DOCUMENTS ANNOTATED LAWS OF MASSACHUSETTS ...

ALM GL ch. 209A, § 1
Page 7
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.
Because the ALM GL c 209A affidavit was factually detailed, based on personal knowledge and observation by the
source, the statements arose under circumstances that supported the veracity of the source, originated from a
disinterested witness, and was trustworthy, it was admissible in the probation revocation hearing. Commonwealth v.
Henderson (2012) 82 Mass App 674, 2012 Mass. App. LEXIS 269.
Because a court could issue an order of prevention and protection even without personal jurisdiction over the father,
who resided in Florida, but could not impose affirmative obligations on the father if there was no personal jurisdiction,
the order's prohibition against abusing, contacting, or approaching the mother or their child required no personal
jurisdiction. However, that portion of the order that required the father to surrender his firearms imposed an affirmative
duty, and such an obligation could only be imposed by a court with personal jurisdiction over the father. accordingly,
that portion of the order was invalid. Caplan v. Donovan (2008) 450 Mass. 463, 879 NE2d 117, 2008 Mass. LEXIS 16,
cert den (2008) 170 L. Ed. 2d 817, 128 S. Ct. 2088, 2008 U.S. LEXIS 3682.
2. What is "abuse"
Party violates order to refrain from abuse when he or she attempts to cause or causes physical harm, places another
in fear of imminent serious physical harm, or causes another to engage involuntarily in sexual relations by force, threat
of force, or duress. Commonwealth v. Gordon (1990) 407 Mass 340, 553 NE2d 915, 1990 Mass LEXIS 197.
Definition of "abuse" in ALM GL c 209A, § 1, i.e., placing another in fear of imminent serious physical harm,
closely approximates common-law description of crime of assault. Commonwealth v. Gordon (1990) 407 Mass 340,
553 NE2d 915, 1990 Mass LEXIS 197.
There was insufficient evidence that defendant's words carried an indicia of proximate execution of the substantive
abuse violation of causing physical harm under ALM GL c 209A, § 1(a), to support a finding that he attempted to violate
the protective order. Commonwealth v. Fortier (2002) 56 Mass App 116, 775 NE2d 785, 2002 Mass App LEXIS 1219.
Child protective order was vacated as the allegations against the father constituted improper parenting, as opposed
to inflicting physical harm on the child where the father: (1) told his seven-year-old child about peculiar and frightening
dreams; (2) tossed a milk container at the child; (3) cuffed the child under the chin in irritation; (4) gave the child a kick
in the back of her legs while both were in bed, again because he was irritated; and (5) pinched his daughter on the arm
so that it left a mark. Szymkowski v. Szymkowski (2003) 57 Mass App 284, 782 NE2d 1085, 2003 Mass App LEXIS 164.
3. --Fear of imminent serious physical harm
Evidence of defendant's violation of ALM GL c 209A order to refrain from abusing victim was sufficient, where
jury could find that actions and words of defendant placed victim in reasonable apprehension that physical force might