1 of 15 DOCUMENTS ANNOTATED LAWS OF MASSACHUSETTS ...

ALM GL ch. 209A, § 1
Page 9
Commonwealth v. Jacobsen (1995) 419 Mass 269, 644 NE2d 213, 1995 Mass LEXIS 1.
Officers had probable cause to submit request for plaintiff's arrest for assault and battery, even though plaintiff
suggests that "probable cause" analysis went afoul when officers erroneously obtained temporary protective order for
victim stripper under ALM GL c 209A, § 1(e) since plaintiff and stripper were not involved in "substantive dating
relationship," because, while choice to seek ALM GL c 209A order may well have contributed to same sense of gravity
that informed decision to arrest, wisdom of obtaining ex parte restraining order has no bearing on question of whether
police had probable cause to arrest. White v. Town of Marblehead (1997) 989 F Supp 345, 1997 US Dist LEXIS 20902.
5. Violation of order
Mother's conduct, threatening the father through his attorney with economic harm unless her demands in a custody
suit were met, violated a ALM GL c 209A no contact order. As a result, the judge did not err in holding the mother in
contempt. L.F. v. L.J. (2008) 2008 Mass. App. LEXIS 571.
Since a father claimed that a mother's actions in a New Jersey proceeding violated the integrity of a Massachusetts
order, that claim was properly addressed by a Massachusetts court; thus, the trial judge correctly denied the mother's
motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction the father's complaint for civil contempt in violating a ALM GL
c 209A order. L.F. v. L.J. (2008) 2008 Mass. App. LEXIS 571.
5.5. Testimony
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.