Legal Question in Family Law in California

In a California Family Law case the Judge stopped trial in a request for a TRO hearing at the beginning of my cross. I had yet to present my arguments.For one reason or another a year later we are finally back and it is a new Judge as the initial Judge has recused herself.

I am the respondent and as the new Judge has went as if it is anew request for it to become permanent he has limited me to only addressing what was contained in the new filing nothing from the original case, so I have yet to be allowed to address why the Temp. should not have been granted. Isn't this an error?/ Doesn't equal protection of the laws mandate I be at least allowed to respond??

What is the answer and if I am right what is the proper way to address as we have closing arguments tomorrow ?/ Thank You Tony in Sonoma


Asked on 5/22/16, 10:05 pm

1 Answer from Attorneys

It is not an error. Whether or not the temp should have been issued is moot, irrelevant. The question is whether there are grounds now, today, to restrain you. Focus on that. It is all the judge will rule on, and all you do is piss a judge off if you demand to waste court time going over something that does not affect the outcome of the case they must decide here and now.

Read more
Answered on 5/23/16, 7:43 am


Related Questions & Answers

More Family Law, Divorce, Child Custody and Adoption questions and answers in California