The most common protective orders in Arizona are orders of protection and injunctions against harassment.  These orders are commonly referred to as “restraining orders.”  Protective orders restrain certain kinds of contact between the plaintiff and the defendant.  At a minimum, they usually order the defendant to stay a distance away from the plaintiff.  They may also restrict telephone and electronic communication (email and text) with the plaintiff.  They may order the defendant to stay away from the plaintiff’s workplace.  In some cases, an order of protection may award the plaintiff exclusive use and possession of a residence previously shared with the defendant.  Under certain conditions, the issuing judge may even include in the protective order a limitation on the defendant’s contact with other “protected persons”, such as the parties’ common children.

In consulting with individuals regarding orders of protection with which they have been served, I am often  told by my client that the order prevents him from seeing his children or that the order prevents him from going to his house.  When I review the paperwork, however, sometimes I find that although the plaintiff requested these restrictions in the petition, the judge did not include those restrictions in the order  itself.   The client is usually very relieved when I explain that the petition simply states what the plaintiff requested but that unless the judge includes those restrictions in the order itself, the restrictions requested in the petition are meaningless.  It’s what’s in the protective order that counts.

I received notice today that the Arizona Bar Family Law Practice and Procedure Committee plans to file a Petition with the Arizona Supreme Court asking it to amend Rule 10 of the Arizona Rules of Protective Order Procedure to make it easier for people to see that petitions for protective orders are not the same as court orders.   If the amendment to Rule 10 is approved, petitions for protective orders will be required to include “a large and distinct provision in a font at least twice the size of any other font on the petition which specifically states “this is not a court order.”    A copy of the committee’s draft Petition to Amend Rule 10 is attached to this post.

I love this proposed amendment!  I believe it will be adopted by the Arizona Supreme Court and will be very helpful to both the parties to protective order proceedings and to law enforcement.

Draft Petition to Amend Rule 10

Copyright © 2011 by Scoresby Family Law – J. Kyle Scoresby, P.C. All rights reserved.