Delk v. Rooney CA4/3

Filed 4/25/13 Delk v. Rooney CA4/3

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION THREE

ABBEY NICOLE DELK,

Plaintiff and Respondent, G046621

v. (Super. Ct. No. 30-2011-00495969)

HEATHER VICTOR ROONEY, OPINION

Defendant and Appellant.

Appeal from an order of the Superior Court of Orange County, Corey S. Cramin, Judge. Affirmed. Heather Victor Rooney, in pro. per., for Defendant and Appellant. Law Offices of Kersten & Associates, William C. Kersten and Brandon R. Creel for Plaintiff and Respondent. * * *

This is an appeal from a restraining order issued by the court against appellant Heather Rooney in January 2011. Rooney argues that the court did not have substantial evidence to support issuing the order and that her due process rights were violated because she did not receive a fair trial. We conclude that Rooney has failed to establish error and therefore affirm. I FACTS On August 1, 2011, respondent Abbey Delk filed a request for orders to stop harassment in Orange County Superior Court. She sought a protective order against Rooney, her husband‟s ex-wife.1 Delk stated in her application that she had “been continuously harassed for over a year with emails, phone calls, verbal threats, and even been physically harmed by . . . Rooney.” Delk stated she had multiple police reports and had been encouraged by the police to seek a protective order. Among other incidents, Delk claimed that Rooney had falsely accused her of abusing one of her stepchildren. Delk also asserted that Rooney had spent three days in jail for contempt of court because of the harassment. Delk‟s documentation alleged damage to her car, a physical altercation resulting in bruises to Delk, e-mails, Delk‟s log of calls to the police, and the warning letter her attorney had sent to Rooney. The court denied Delk‟s request for a temporary restraining order and set a date for an order to show cause. Rooney‟s response to Delk‟s request denied the harassment and provided a four-page narrative response to Delk‟s assertions. She also provided three letters from witnesses she claimed were relevant. On August 17, the matter came on for hearing. The parties reached a stipulation to resolve the matter. The stipulation provided that both parties agreed to stay