Legal Question in Criminal Law in California

Ex-business partner threatened, filed,and obtained false domestic violence order if she did not go away from partnership and take 25% (in emails) in 2010 to prevent Defendant from reporting assault and to take over business. (This year, a Judge made a finding that there was no domestic violence, it was about business and money) At hearing Commissioner after Defendant made a very long response in cross complaint with corroborating evidence via emails and affidavits, that Plaintiff had assaulted Defendant, was not afraid, and in fact filed it to prevent Defendant from reporting physical assault and to take away business. Commissioner issued enjoining restraining orders regarding the business ordering that Plaintiff and Defendant, without making findings as required by Family Code 6305. Commissioner ordered that Plaintiff and Defendant could only be around each other in the context of their business. Defendant made report in 2010 Sheriff that the Plaintiff had fabricated a restraining order and had assaulted her on more than one occasion. Defendant also emailed Sheriff and told this. Sheriff did not believe Defendant as she had a restraining order against her. After Plaintiff found out that Defendant reported to policed the assaults, Plaintiff used restraining order against Defendant. Defendant went to meet with pre-scheduled clients as Plaintiff had emailed and reminded Defendant of appointment 2 days prior, in an email one month prior, and it was on the schedule. Defendant arrived at location to meet with clients. Plaintiff stated that he started a new business and he had acquired customers through his new business. Plaintiff went to police and stated that he started new business and Defendant just showed up. Sheriff called Defendant and stated that if she ever showed up at that business location ever again she would be arrested. Plaintiff then attempted to file another restraining order which was turned down. Defendant filed a civil suit regarding the business. The Judge dismissed the domestic violence order without prejudice. Plaintiff settled in lawsuit to give Defendant rights to the business URL. 6 weeks later, Plaintiff takes over URL and tell Defendant if she attempts to get it back, he will bring criminal charges. 2011, Plaintiff filed another domestic violence order against Defendant and duplicate verbatim against her new husband, fabricated fear and stating that he "heard" from unnamed witness Defendant showed up in town to introduce husband and broke into his website failing to mention that he threatened her with arrest if she attempted to get URL back. Plaintiff had never met nor would Defendant want to introduce husband. Case dismissed with Prejudice, no domestic violence, about property and money. In meantime, Plaintiff does not inform court that there is a verbatim order against Defendant's husband that was dismissed with prejudice. Plaintiff attempts to have Defendant's husband arrested on violation of TRO. Two days later, Plaintiff does not show up in court after extending out order for 2 months that was never served. Case dismissed. Defendant attempted again to report to Sheriff that the Plaintiff criminally extorted her and told that the case were dismissed with prejudice no domestic violence, about business and money. Defendant believes Plaintiff is in violation of several Penal Codes and would like it investigated by District Attorney. After showing minutes from the court, showing dismissal with prejudice, about property and money, Sheriff states to investigate that he needs a letter from the Judge and wants Defendant to obtain it explaining to Deputy exactly why Judge determined No domestic violence. Deputy states maybe the Judge was just "exasperated" when he made decision. If there had never been an order against Defendant and Defendant had reported Domestic Violence / assault the Defendant would have credibility. Another problem has been that the Plaintiff has a friend that works for business that is volunteer community officer at Sheriffs Department threatening the Defendant with arrest and has been intricately involve and has had influence.

1 Answer from Attorneys

Related Questions & Answers

More Criminal Law questions and answers in California

Looking for something else?