![]() |
An appellate court decision recently handed down in a local domestic-violence case should make it easier for battered women to get continued police protection from abusive ex-husbands after they get divorced.
In a ruling issued in May, the 4th District Court of Appeals overturned a decision by the Athens County Common Pleas Court, which had refused a woman's request for a five-year civil protection order against her ex-husband, based at least in part on the view that because the couple was getting divorced, she wouldn't need further protection.
Pat Smith, a court advocate for the My Sister's Place battered women's shelter in Athens, said the ruling addresses an issue that she sees frequently. Just because a man and woman get divorced, she said, doesn't mean the abusive spouse won't continue to terrorize the ex.
"We do see it a lot," Smith said, noting that especially if a couple has children, they may end up having some contact after a divorce unless there's a court order in place to avoid this.
"Just because you get a divorce, they're still going to have contact with each other until those children are raised," she suggested.
The lower court had issued a one-year order to protect the woman against contact by her ex-husband, which was to be terminated once the divorce was finalized. The woman, fearing possible future violence from her ex, had wanted the order to last five years.
The appeals court found that the lower court was wrong when it reasoned that once a couple gets divorced, there's no longer any need for a court order protecting one party from a potentially violent ex-spouse.
According to court documents, the woman and her husband had a physical altercation in a local store in January 2008, which led to the husband's arrest. He claims the fight was over her having sent naked pictures of herself to a married man on her cell phone. Five days later, the woman filed a petition for a protection order, which was immediately granted.
About two weeks later, a magistrate held a hearing on the issue, during which the woman testified that her husband had recently committed acts of domestic violence that included threatening her, frightening her with a gun, and forcing her to have sex against her will.
The magistrate granted a six-month protection order, but added that based on the fact that the couple had entered divorce proceedings, "there will be little future contact and no need to continue a civil protection order beyond the time of the divorce proceedings."
The woman asked for the CPO to last five years "“ the longest time it can last, according to Ohio law. Common Pleas Judge Michael Ward didn't grant that, though he did extend it to a year.
The woman, with the help of Southeast Ohio Legal Services, appealed the CPO decision.
SEOLS attorneys argued that based on Ohio case law, public policy concerns support extending a protection order past the finalizing of a divorce, because "the risk of assault is greatest when a woman leaves or threatens to leave an abusive relationship."
The husband's attorney claimed in his appeal brief that there's no evidence his client ever committed domestic violence, and that the woman "fabricated her story of domestic violence as an inexpensive way to obtain personal property" "“ in this case, a Jeep Wrangler whose ownership the couple was disputing "“ "and get rid of an unwanted husband without incurring any legal expense."
The appeals court noted in its ruling that no part of the divorce case was entered into evidence in connection with the woman's separate case seeking a civil protection order. Therefore, the appellate court ruled, the trial court abused its discretion in using the fact that the divorce was pending as a rationale for not granting a five-year protection order.
My Sister's Place Executive Director Kate McGuckin said she believes the appeals court's ruling is common sense.
"Think about it," she said. "You can only get a temporary protection order for six months, because in six months you'll be divorced and the violence will end. Excuse me?"