Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

B.A.D v. L.E

January 23, 2012

B.A.D., PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT,
v.
L.E.,
DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.



On appeal from the Superior Court of New Jersey, Chancery Division, Family Part, Union County, Docket No. FV-20-002076-10.

Per curiam.

RECORD IMPOUNDED

NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION

Submitted November 15, 2011

Before Judges Yannotti and Kennedy.

Defendant appeals from a final restraining order under the Protection Against Domestic Violence Act, N.J.S.A. 2C:25-17 to -35. Defendant's former boyfriend, plaintiff B.A.D., obtained the order after the court found that defendant committed an act of harassment against him. See N.J.S.A. 2C:33-4 (defining harassment); N.J.S.A. 2C:25-19 (defining harassment as an act of domestic violence). We affirm.

On June 30, 2010, B.A.D. filed a Domestic Violence Civil Complaint against L.E. alleging he was harassed on June 29, 2010. He asserted that L.E. called his cell phone ten times on that evening, stating that she "knew where [B.A.D.] lives and [L.E.] was going to come by." B.A.D. told the defendant not to come but, notwithstanding that request, saw L.E. standing with two other individuals in the parking lot of his apartment complex. B.A.D. said that he went back inside and called the police. A temporary restraining order was entered and a hearing was scheduled.

B.A.D. testified that he and L.E. had an intimate dating relationship from 2005 to 2008 and that in April 2009, L.E. obtained a final restraining order against him on the basis of alleged domestic violence. He explained, however, that L.E. continued to contact him three to four days per week in an effort to "reconcile" and that on occasion she threatened to make his life a "living hell."

He indicated that on June 29, 2010, L.E. called him ten times over the course of a few hours and stated that she was going to "come by" his home because she "knew where he lives."

B.A.D. told her not to come by. He considered L.E.'s statement that she knew where he lived to be a "threat."

He testified that at approximately 10:00 p.m. that evening he left his apartment to buy a pizza and that, when he did so, he saw L.E. in the parking lot near his apartment with a woman and a man. He then went back to his apartment to call the police but when they arrived L.E. was gone.

Plaintiff also presented the testimony of two witnesses.

B.A.D.'s girlfriend testified that L.E. called B.A.D. ten times that evening and that she, in fact, looked out the window at approximately 10:00 p.m. and saw L.E. standing in the parking lot. The other witness indicated that he had parked his pick-up truck in the parking lot of the apartment complex and that L.E. arrived at the apartment complex in a car with a girlfriend and subsequently went over and spoke with him. He also recalled that this occurred at approximately 10:00 p.m.

Following the presentation of testimony, the trial judge made findings of fact and conclusions of law. The trial judge found that on June 29, 2010, L.E. called B.A.D. ten times and at one point stated "I know where you live", which B.A.D. took for a threat. He also determined that L.E. later showed up at the parking lot in B.A.D.'s apartment complex, despite B.A.D.'s request that L.E. not come over to his residence. The trial judge specifically found the testimony of B.A.D. to be more credible than that of L.E. and he also found ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.