K.L. v. R.H.
California Court of Appeal
70 Cal. App. 5th 965 (2021)
- Written by Jamie Milne, JD
Facts
R.H. (defendant) and K.L. (plaintiff) dated for just over a year and had a child together, Z.L. There were multiple instances in which K.L. physically abused R.H. One time, K.L. showed up at R.H.’s residence, pointed a gun at her, and hit her in the face. After R.H. locked herself in her bedroom, K.L. broke through the door, repeatedly punched her, slammed her head into the nightstand, and tore out braids sewn to her scalp. Another time, K.L. pushed a pregnant R.H. off a bed, causing a hemorrhage. And in another instance, K.L. drugged and sexually assaulted R.H. Z.L. and R.H.’s child from a previous relationship were injured in some of the assaults. After the couple separated, a court granted temporary restraining orders to both parties. However, some contact remained necessary because they shared custody of Z.L. At one custody exchange, K.L. punched R.H. in the head in front of a police station. R.H. also engaged in some undesirable conduct. At a custody exchange, R.H. verbally threatened to kill K.L. And messages in a court-ordered communication app revealed that R.H. insulted K.L. and was sometimes late for custody exchanges. About a year after the couple’s separation, K.L. filed a request for an order under California’s Domestic Violence Prevention Act (DVPA) to protect himself and Z.L. from R.H. The next day, R.H. filed a similar request for a DVPA order against K.L. The trial court issued DVPA orders in favor of both parties and issued associated custody orders that gave K.L. and R.H. joint custody of Z.L. R.H. appealed, arguing that the court’s grant of mutual DVPA orders was improper.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Zelon, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
