The juvenile court abused its discretion in denying Mother’s request for a domestic violence restraining order because she was no longer living with Father. The minors were removed from their parents due to domestic violence perpetrated by Father, among other reasons. The juvenile court issued a temporary restraining order (TRO) but declined to later issue a permanent restraining order because the parents were no longer living together. Instead, the juvenile court orally directed the parents to stay away from one another. The appellate court reversed. Substantial evidence was presented that Father perpetuated domestic violence against Mother and violated the TRO on at least one occasion. A court may not deny a request for a restraining order on the basis that the parents no longer live together. The use of residential separation as a substitute for a restraining order is inappropriate given that future interaction is inevitable due to the need to coparent. Thus, the stay away order was insufficient to protect Mother. Mother should be granted the protections of a restraining order, such as entry into CLETS and immediate enforcement by police. Remand was required for a new hearing on the permanent restraining order.

The full opinion is available on the court’s website here:
https://www.courts.ca.gov/opinions/documents/B327857.PDF