FRO reversed where no judge finding of need to protect plaintiff L.B. v. J.P.
Defendant appealed from the FRO entered in favor of plaintiff and from the award of counsel fees to plaintiff. After meeting at work, the parties began a two-year dating relationship. After their relationship ended, plaintiff married another woman he had been dating, while defendant left the company the parties worked at. Plaintiff filed a domestic violence complaint against defendant. The parties ultimately reached a civil agreement, in which defendant acknowledged and agreed that any violation of the agreement would constitute an act of harassment.
Thereafter, defendant contacted plaintiff several times through email and Facebook. Plaintiff then filed the present domestic violence complaint against defendant, alleging predicate acts of harassment and cyber-harassment.
At trial, plaintiff, plaintiff's wife, and defendant all testified. The trial court made only a single credibility finding, rejecting defendant's testimony regarding why she contacted plaintiff. The trial court made no other credibility findings as to the witnesses who testified.
The trial court concluded that defendant had a purpose to harass defendant given her violation of the parties' agreement, her use of coarse language in the emails, and the trial court's rejection of defendant's reasons for sending the emails. The trial court accordingly entered a FRO and awarded plaintiff counsel fees.
On appeal, the court reversed and dismissed plaintiff's domestic violence complaint. The appeal court found that defendant's emails, while crude, did not rise to the level of harassment because defendant made no threats towards plaintiff.
The appeal court also noted that the trial court failed to consider whether a restraining order was necessary to protect plaintiff.
https://www.law.com/njlawjournal/almI...
