Summary
This Connecticut Appellate Court opinion affirms the trial court's denial of a defendant's motion to dismiss and its issuance of a civil order of protection under General Statutes § 46b-15. The court held that the plaintiff presented sufficient evidence to establish a prima facie case of domestic violence, including emotional abuse and threats, supported by testimony from the plaintiff and a guardian ad litem. Addressing the defendant's claim that the trial court relied on outdated statutory standards and background factors rather than specific evidentiary findings, the appellate court concluded that the defendant failed to request an articulation and improperly anchored his appeal on a superseded version of the statute, leaving the record ambiguous but insufficient to demonstrate reversible error.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the trial court erred in denying the defendant's motion to dismiss for lack of a prima facie case.
- Whether the trial court erred in issuing a civil order of protection under General Statutes §46b-15.
Holdings
- The trial court properly denied the motion to dismiss because the plaintiff produced evidence sufficient to establish a prima facie case under Practice Book §15-8.
- The trial court properly issued the protective order because the statutory language of §46b-15, as amended, permits issuance based on stalking, a pattern of threatening, or coercive control, not solely on a continuous threat of physical injury.
Key quotations
“The well settled standard of review in domestic relations cases is that this court will not disturb trial court orders unless the trial court has abused its legal discretion or its findings have no reasonable basis in the facts.” (at 10)
“The issue of whether the court held the parties to the proper standard of proof is a question of law. When issues in an appeal concern questions of law, this court reviews such claims de novo.” (at 11)
Factual background
The parties were in a dating relationship that ended in 2019 and are parents of a minor child, E. The plaintiff alleged emotional, psychological, and occasional physical abuse, including threats, stalking, and possession of a firearm. The plaintiff filed three separate applications for relief from abuse under §46b-15, each resulting in ex parte restraining orders. Testimony at the evidentiary hearing included the plaintiff's account of abuse and a guardian ad litem's testimony.
Procedural history
The plaintiff filed multiple applications for relief from abuse under §46b-15 in the Superior Court, Judicial District of New London at Norwich. The trial court issued ex parte restraining orders, denied the defendant's motion to dismiss, and entered a judgment granting the plaintiff's relief. The defendant appealed to the Connecticut Appellate Court.