Restraining Order In San Diego Results

Restraining order attorney David Pflaum has the expertise that helps his clients win a restraining order in San Diego.

Click on restraining order process for helpful information.

RESTRAINING ORDER IN SAN DIEGO RESULTS *

1.  GIRLFRIEND ACCUSES HER BOYFRIEND OF RAPE

Our respondent client lived with the petitioner girlfriend who was out of work for a long time.  When respondent advised the petitioner that he would no longer support her and she had to find another place to live, she filed a domestic violence temporary restraining order accusing him of assault, battery and rape.

During trial attorney Pflaum proved to the judge the girlfriend was totally unbelievable for many reasons.  She could not describe the crimes well, never called the police, never sought medical attention, had no evidence of injury, and admitted on the witness stand her motive that she was angry for having the relationship ended.  DVRO case dismissed.  (In re matter of R.J.)

2.  TERRIFYING HARASSMENT

Our clients were husband and wife petitioners who were harassed and threatened by the wife’s ex-husband, a retired police officer still packing heat in the form of rifles and handguns.During a trial that lasted over three months, attorney Pflaum presented evidence from seven witnesses, one video, two tape recordings and multiple email messages.

The judge ordered the respondent to surrender his firearms and granted a permanent restraining order  for three years.  (In re matter of M.S.)

3.  ACCUSATION OF PHYSICAL ATTACK

Our client was the respondent who was accused of attacking the petitioner with a knife.  Attorney Pflaum skillfully cross examined the petitioner and demonstrated to the judge that she was not telling the truth.

She changed her story several times and finally confessed on the witness stand that her wrongful motive for filing the TRO was to damage the reputation of the respondent.  The TRO was dismissed. (In re matter of C.P.)

4.  FEUDING NEIGHBORS REACH A GOOD SETTLEMENT

Our petitioner clients were the victims of an ongoing campaign of abuse, threats, stalking and harassment from their respondent neighbors.  Attorney Pflaum interviewed four witnesses and prepared them for trial, examined and prepared photographs and timelines of the abuse, prepared exhibits for trial, researched the criminal background of the neighbors, and appeared at trial.

The judge called the case for trial and the petitioners and respondents announced ready to go forward.  After testimony and the presentation of evidence had begun, the petitioners and respondents were able to settle the matter.  The results gave the petitioners TRO protection for twelve months with an opportunity to renew the TRO.  (In re matter of S.B.)

5.  A THREAT TO KILL

Our client was served with a restraining order that claimed he threatened to kill two other people.  Attorney Pflaum presented credible testimony from the client and witnesses denying the allegations of threats and aggressively cross examined the petitioner to prove she was not believable.  The judge denied the request for a permanent restraining order. (In re matter of J.N.)

6.  THREATS OF GRAVE BODILY HARM

Our client was served with a temporary restraining order by his daughter-in-law.  The restraining order alleged that our client had made death threats against her and her family.

We proved by witness testimony and evidence that our client had never made any threats.  The request for a permanent restraining order was dismissed.  The losing side was ordered to reimburse our client for all legal fees.  (In re matter of C.D.)

7.  A NEIGHBOR DISPUTE IS RESOLVED THROUGH MEDIATION

Our client and her young son were involved in some altercations with the neighbors who filed a TRO.  We arranged for our client and the neighbors to mediate their dispute and settle the matter out of court in a mutually beneficial way.  The TRO was dismissed. (In re matter of S.B.)

8.  THREATS, VIOLENCE AND BROKEN JEWELRY

Our client was served with a DVRO by his girlfriend.  She accused our client of hitting her, threatening her, pushing her into the bushes, and breaking her jewelry.  We investigated the case and found out that petitioner owed our client over $6000.  The petitioner refused to pay back the money.  We proved that she therefore had a very bad financial motive to file the DVRO to try to keep our client from collecting the money.  The judge dismissed the domestic violence restraining order. (In re matter of D.T.)

9.  EX-LOVERS AGREE TO HAVE NO CONTACT WITH EACH OTHER

Our client was served with a DVRO from her boyfriend who she no longer wanted to see.  We gathered evidence, prepared for trial, and appeared at trial.  Prior to beginning trial, Mr. Pflaum met with the petitioner and respondent to reach an informal agreement to have no further contact with each other.  The TRO was dismissed. (In re matter of M.W.)

10.  FEUDING NEIGHBORS

Our respondent client was served with a restraining order from his neighbor. The neighbor accused the client of interfering with his regular activities, personal harassment, and causing him to be afraid.  Through investigation of the facts, we discovered that the person’s claims were not true.  The request for a TRO was dismissed.  The neighbor was ordered to pay our client attorneys fees. (In re matter of L.C.)

11.  EX-GIRLFRIEND UPSET AT HER BOYFRIEND

Our respondent client was served with a a DVRO by his ex-girlfriend who was jealous of his new girlfriend.  The petitioner accused our client of vandalism and making threats, but had no objective proof or corroboration.  Case dismissed.  (In re matter of F.M.)

12.  WIFE SEPARATED FROM HER HUSBAND CLAIMS POISONING

Our client was served with a domestic violence restraining order by his wife.  The wife accused him of putting poison and glass in her soup, hitting her and causing bruises.

At trial attorney Pflaum questioned the wife vigorously about her allegations and proved to the judge that petitioner was not injured, had no evidence in support of her allegations, and had a motive to lie.  DVRO dismissed.  (In re matter of J.S.)

13.  SEXUAL HARASSMENT WITH NO JUSTIFICATION

Our client was served with a TRO by a female neighbor he did not even know.  The female neighbor accused him of sexually harassing her.  We interviewed our client and witnesses.  We discovered that the female neighbor’s boyfriend was arrested and charged with driving under the influence of alcohol and a hit and run.  She blamed our client for the arrest.  At trial we proved that our client did not know the neighbor and did nothing wrong.

TRO dismissed. (In re matter of F.R.)

14.  NEIGHBOR HARASSMENT

Our client was served with a TRO by a disgruntled neighbor making all sorts of outrageous complaints about our client.  She accused him of threatening and attacking her and her 5 year old son and purposely making all sorts of noise to disturb her.

We investigated her background, appeared in court on behalf of our client and proved not only the allegations were unsupported by any credible evidence, but that there was no future threat of harm.  The judge dismissed the TRO. (In re matter of P.A.)

15.  PHYSICAL ABUSE TO TWO PETITIONERS

The client was charged with harassing and physically abusing two people.  Both of the two people testified during the trial.  As a result of cross examination by attorney Pflaum, the two people were found to be incredible and not entitled to any further court protection.  TRO dismissed with an order to pay the client’s attorney fees. (In re matter of L.G.)

16.  THREATS OF HARM AND A PHYSICAL FIGHT

Our client was accused in a TRO declaration of beating another woman and threatening to attack her in the future.  We met with the client, prepared for trial, and introduced evidence that showed our client was actually the victim of an assault and battery at the hands of the petitioner.  Further, the petitioner had a motive to lie because she was mad at our client’s boyfriend.  The judge dismissed the request for a permanent retraining order case with prejudice. (In re matter of M.J.)

17.  THREATS OF PHYSICAL HARM BECAUSE OF JEALOUSY

Our client was served with a restraining order from a female neighbor. She accused our client of threatening to harm her because she was having an affair with our client’s husband.

We met with the client and her witness, gathered evidence and prepared the case for trial.  Attorney Pflaum cross examined the petitioner to prove that the petitioner was not telling the truth.  The judge denied the request for a permanent restraining order. (In re matter of B.O.)

18.  HEATED NEIGHBOR ARGUMENT

Our client was served with a TRO from a neighbor who claimed harassment.  We prepared the case for the trial, appeared in court on behalf of our client, presented testimony from a witness on behalf of our client, and aggressively examined the petitioner.  We proved that he was actually the person doing all of the harassment.  The judge agreed and dismissed the TRO against our client.  (In re matter of K.H.).

19.  MUTUAL COMBAT

Our client was working at a construction site.  Another construction worker was mad at him, was verbally abusive, and challenged him to a fight.

Our client and the other construction worker had the fight. The other construction worker lost the fight, then filed a request for a temporary restraining order against our client. We went to court and during trial convinced the judge that the petitioner was the one who started the fight.  The respondent had a right to defend himself.  The judge agreed and dismissed the TRO. (In re matter of J.C.).

20.  PARKING DISPUTE ERUPTS IN A FIGHT

Our client was the respondent who lived with his family in a home in a very small neighborhood with many cars but little parking space.  The petitioner was a neighbor who was upset at our client for blocking the street with his car, parking in the wrong space, and disrespecting his wife.

One evening the neighbor confronted our client and his mother while they were repairing their car.  The neighbor stated to our client “lets settle this man to man” and pushed our client.  Our client responded by punching the neighbor.  The neighbor filed a TRO.  We proved at trial through the presentation of photographs and witnesses, and the cross examination of petitioner, that petitioner was the aggressor who went looking for trouble and confronted our client.

Our client therefore had the right to defend himself and his mother. The court dismissed the TRO.  (In re matter of I.A.).

21. SISTER v. SISTER ABUSE

Our client was the petitioner who had been repeatedly stalked, harassed and threatened by the respondent who was her sister.  The petitioner filed a request for a domestic violence restraining order by herself which was denied without prejudice.  Petitioner retained Mr. Pflaum to file another request for a restraining order in San Diego against her sister.

Attorney Pflaum met with petitioner to review the previous restraining order file, analyze text messages, emails, court records, audios, medical records, and witness statements.  Attorney Pflaum presented evidence to the judge in support of petitioners case which included testimony from petitioner, testimony from three witnesses to corroborate petitioner’s allegations, plus texts, emails, and medical records showing that petitioner was suffering mental and physical harm from the harassment.

The court granted the request for a permanent injunction for one year with the right to seek a renewal. (In re matter of I.H.)

22.  VICTIM OF SEXUAL ABUSE

Our client was the petitioner who was a victim of sexual assault and ongoing harassment.   We appeared in court to request that the domestic violence temporary restraining order become permanent.  The judge granted our request.  After trial attorney Pflaum filed a motion for attorneys fees.  The judge ordered the respondent to pay the petitioner a portion of the petitioners attorney’s fees. (In re matter J.S.)

23.  EX DAUGHTER-IN-LAW MAKING FALSE CLAIMS

Our client received a temporary restraining order in San Diego from his ex daughter-in-law accusing him of harassing her over the phone.  We met with the client and a witness, gathered evidence and prepared the case for trial.  During the trial we proved to the judge that the petitioner was not telling the truth.  As a result the judge dismissed the case with prejudice. (In re matter of F.T.).

24.  RESPONDENT TRIED TO AVOID THE RESTRAINING ORDER

Our client needed protection from harassment and threats.  We knew where the respondent lived but the respondent would not answer his front door to receive the TRO papers.  Attorney Pflaum turned to the resources of a professional process server to deliver the TRO.  The process server went to the respondent’s residence and pretended to be a lost pizza delivery person.  When the respondent opened the front door, the process server delivered the TRO papers.  Service of process was successful.  (In re matter of A.D.).

25.  AN APOLOGY, ATTORNEYS FEES, AND PROTECTION

The petitioner was our client and the victim of public harassment causing her substantial embarrassment and humiliation.  The respondent denied the allegations of the TRO and hired an attorney to defend her.  The first restraining order in San Diego hearing was continued for both sides to prepare for another lengthy hearing.

Prior to trial attorney Pflaum presented information and evidence to respondents attorney in order to settle the case.  Petitioner and respondent were successful in settling the matter with a written apology from respondent, payment of attorneys fees, and an extension of the TRO for six months. (In re matter of R.N).

26.  ASSAULT AND HARASSMENT BETWEEN NEIGHBORS

Our husband and wife clients were served with a TRO for allegedly threatening and harassing a neighbor.  The TRO demanded attorney fees of $3500.

Mr. Pflaum met with his clients for many hours to examine the allegations, prepare the opposition, and get ready for trial.  Immediately prior to trial in court, attorney Pflaum met with the petitioners attorney and the petitioner to request a dismissal of the TRO and to explain why the dismissal was best for everyone.  The parties were able to come to an agreement to dismiss the TRO. (In re matter of R.H)

27.  PETITION TO RENEW A DOMESTIC VIOLENCE TRO DENIED

Petitioner sought to renew a domestic violence restraining order after three years against our respondent client.  We presented substantial evidence to the judge to show that the request to extend the DVRO, though allowed by law, was not justified under the circumstances.  The judge agreed and dismissed the petition for a renewal.  (In re matter of P.F.)

28.  VICTORY FOR A RESPONDENT SERVED WITH A FRIVOLOUS TRO

Our client received a TRO that was not justified by the circumstances of the case.  We prepared and served a subpoena for production of documents.  We prepared and filed a notice of lodgement with important information for the judge’s review.  At trial we demonstrated that petitioner had no justification for the TRO but was actually using the TRO process for an ulterior motive to prevent the respondent from building a fence next to the petitioner’s property.  The TRO was dismissed with prejudice.  (In re matter of C.S.)

29.  RESPONDENTS GET THEIR DAY IN COURT

Petitioner was having an affair with our respondent client.  Petitioner claimed to be the victim of a threat and violence at the hands of respondent and her daughter.  At trial, however, we convinced the judge not to believe anything that petitioner claimed.  Case dismissed.  (In re matter of B.V).

30.  ALLEGED ROAD RAGE AND THREATS

Our client was the respondent who allegedly engaged in road rage and threats.  We discredited the petitioner by cross examination, presentation of evidence, a search of court records, and testimony.  Case dismissed with prejudice.  (In re matter of P.D).

31.  COMMUNITY CARETAKER DEFENSE

Our client was the respondent accused of stalking a neighbor.  We proved that she was not stalking but was engaged in lawful activity to protect the community.  TRO dismissed.  (In re matter of S.G.)

 FOR A RESTRAINING ORDER IN SAN DIEGO

THE RIGHT ATTORNEY MAKES THE DIFFERENCE

Learn more @ Google, Avvo, Yelp

Call 760-806-4333

*Descriptions of results are intended to provide information about restraining order cases that David Pflaum has handled.  The results are not intended to provide a guarantee about the outcome of your case.  The outcome depends upon the facts, evidence, and opinion of the judge.  Attorney Pflaum does his very best for every client.

This page is also available in: Spanish