Servin v. Rios CA2/2

California Court of Appeal Oct 1, 2020 No. B297231Unpublished

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in issuing a three-year restraining order under the Domestic Violence Prevention Act, as there was substantial evidence that the defendant's controlling and coercive behavior disturbed the plaintiff's peace.

Issues

Whether the defendant's conduct constituted 'abuse' under the Domestic Violence Prevention Act by 'disturbing the peace' of the plaintiff.
Whether the trial court's findings were sufficient to support the issuance of a restraining order.
Whether the trial court acted improperly by asking the self-represented plaintiff leading questions during the hearing.

Disposition. Affirmed

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“A person “disturb[s] the peace” of another if he “destroy[s] th[at person’s] mental or emotional calm.””

“the cases cited above uniformly hold that “controlling behavior” that manifests itself in harassment (through unwelcomed encounters and isolating behavior) constitutes “disturbing the peace” and thus constitutes “abuse.””

“Because the court issued the order in this case, it necessarily found that Rios’s controlling behavior rose to the level of disturbing plaintiff’s peace and we can—and will—imply that finding.”

Filed 10/1/20 Servin v. Rios CA2/2 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS

California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION TWO

JILLEANNE SERVIN, B297231

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. 19STRO01928) v.

SAUL RIOS,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Holly A. Thomas, Judge. Affirmed.

Tritt & Tritt, and James F. Tritt for Defendant and Appellant.

No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.

******

A trial court issued a three-year restraining order under the Domestic Violence Prevention Act (the Act) (Fam. Code, § 6200 et seq.).1 The enjoined party appeals, arguing that his conduct did not constitute “abuse” within the meaning of the Act. We disagree, and affirm. FACTS AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND I. Facts Jilleanne Servin (plaintiff) and Saul Rios (Rios) worked together and started dating in 2017, and moved in together (along with plaintiff’s two minor children by another man) in December 2017. During the time they lived together, Rios was “very controlling” of plaintiff. He would restrict who she could talk with and who she could go out with; he also sometimes took her phone away. Plaintiff moved out in November 2018, and she told him their relationship was over. Rios told her she was “not allowed to leave him.” Over the next several months, Rios would show up uninvited to the house where plaintiff had moved and would “constantly tap on the window,” “knock on the door,” or “talk through the mailbox” to urge plaintiff to “come out and talk [with] him, or have lunch with him.” Plaintiff occasionally acceded to his demands, but each time told him that she “no longer wanted to be with him or see him [romantically] anymore.” She told him this “firmly” in February 2019. On March 20, 2019, Rios saw plaintiff walking along the sidewalk, pulled his truck in front of her to block her path, and “demanded” that she get in. She obeyed. When plaintiff told him that she had to go to the bank, Rios drove her to the bank and

Servin v. Rios CA2/2

AI Brief

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION TWO

JILLEANNE SERVIN, B297231

SAUL RIOS,

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

AI Brief