Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Judge panel questions whether record shows imminent threat in restraining-order appeal
Summary
In CK v. SH, counsel argued that extensions of a protective order were unsupported by evidence of a reasonable fear of imminent serious physical harm; the panel probed timing, hearsay and whether the father’s violent acts toward the mother translated into imminent risk to the daughter.
Stephen Goldwin, representing the appellant in an appeal of continuing restraining-order extensions, told the court the record lacks proof that the daughter remained in reasonable fear of imminent serious physical harm and questioned why she waited six weeks after an incident to seek court protection.
Already have an account? Log in
Subscribe to keep reading
Unlock the rest of this article — and every article on Citizen Portal.
- Unlimited articles
- AI-powered breakdowns of topics, speakers, decisions, and budgets
- Instant alerts when your location has a new meeting
- Follow topics and more locations
- 1,000 AI Insights / month, plus AI Chat
