Odden v. Rath

2007 ND 51 (N.D. 2007) · Supreme Court of North Dakota · April 10, 2007 · No. No. 20060170

Summary

The Supreme Court of North Dakota affirmed an order extending a domestic violence protection order against Mark Rath for two years. The court held that a petitioner seeking an extension need not make a second showing of actual or imminent domestic violence when the original order was issued after a merits hearing establishing that circumstance. The court concluded that Rath's violation of the original order, website postings, the parties' history, and Odden's continuing fear supported the extension.

Court
Supreme Court of North Dakota
Writing for the Court
Vande Walle, Chief Justice; Carol Ronning Kapsner; Mary Muehlen Maring; Daniel J. Crothers; Dale V. Sandstrom
Jurisdiction
North Dakota
Decision date
April 10, 2007
Docket number
No. 20060170
Procedural posture
Mark Rath appealed from a district court order extending a domestic violence protection order for two additional years.
Standard of review
The decision to extend an existing domestic violence protection order is reviewed for abuse of discretion. Whether domestic violence was sufficient to support issuance of a protection order is a question of fact reviewed for clear error. A district court abuses its discretion when it acts arbitrarily, unreasonably, or unconscionably, or misinterprets or misapplies the law.
Precedential value
Published North Dakota Supreme Court opinion
Parties
Mark Rath v. Heather Odden
Disposition
affirmed

Topics

domestic violencefamily law procedureappellate procedurestandard of reviewstatutory interpretation

Practice areas

family lawdomestic violenceappellate procedurestatutory interpretationremedies

Questions Presented

  1. Whether a petitioner seeking an extension of a domestic violence protection order must make a second showing of actual or imminent domestic violence.
  2. Whether the district court abused its discretion by extending the protection order based on Rath's email, website postings, the parties' history, and Odden's continuing fear.

Holdings

  1. When the original protection order was issued after a hearing on the merits finding actual or imminent domestic violence, the petitioner need not make a second showing of actual or imminent domestic violence to obtain an extension under N.D.C.C. § 14-07.1-02(6).
  2. The district court did not abuse its discretion in extending the domestic violence protection order because the evidence, considered as a whole, reasonably supported the extension.

Key quotations

In order to obtain an extension of the protection order, the petitioner need not make a second showing of actual or imminent domestic violence. (¶ 16)
A petitioner's fear alone, with no other supporting facts, is not enough to justify the extension of a protection order. (¶ 24)

Factual background

Odden and Rath had a turbulent relationship, shared a young son, and were involved in ongoing custody-related litigation. After a prior petition was dismissed, Odden obtained a domestic violence protection order following evidence that Rath had threatened and harassed her, including an incident during her pregnancy and repeated electronic communications. Before the order expired, Odden sought an extension based on Rath's continued discussion of her and the custody dispute on his website, an email sent to her, and her continuing fear that he would contact her. The district court extended the order for two years.

Procedural history

Odden obtained a one-year domestic violence protection order against Rath after a full hearing on the merits. Before the order expired, she moved for an extension, and the district court extended the order through April 15, 2008. Rath appealed, arguing that the evidence did not justify the extension. The North Dakota Supreme Court affirmed.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…