ORDER OF PROTECTION SOUGHT TO PROVIDE MEANINGFUL PROTECTION
After a fact-finding hearing, the Kings County Family Court determined that MF had committed family offenses of “attempted assault in the third degree, harassment in the second degree, and disorderly conduct.” And, as a result, was directed “to stay away from [NZ] and excluded him from the parties' home until and including March 10, 2023.”
On appeal, the Appellate Division, Second Department, noted that family offenses must be based on a “fair preponderance of the evidence.” And in this case, it thought the record supported all the charges, except for “disorderly conduct,” because it had not been shown that MF intended to cause “public inconvenience, annoyance, or alarm.”
Notwithstanding that modification, it did agree that the order of protection (excluding MF from their residence) was an appropriate remedy in this instance, “since it was reasonably necessary to provide meaningful protection to [NZ] and to eradicate the root of the domestic disturbance.”
Think the parties will remain rooted?
# # #
DECISION