Matlock v. Weets

Robin Matlock (plaintiff) and Jon Weets (defendant) dated for a few weeks in the fall of 1991 before Matlock broke up with Weets. Shortly after the break-up, Weets began stalking and harassing Matlock in numerous ways. He called, sent letters and cards, left presents at her back door, and jogged by her house. In February 1992, Weets entered Matlock’s house, uninvited, to leave Valentine’s Day gifts on the kitchen table. Matlock’s mother was home alone at the time, and she was frightened by Weets’s intrusion. Thereafter, Weets continued “showing up” at different places as Matlock was going to and from work, which was unusual because she took a different route every day. Weets frequently passed by Matlock’s house, sometimes multiple times a day. By the summer of 1992, Matlock contacted police and the county attorney, who told Weets to leave Matlock alone. The county attorney did not believe Weets would stop his obsessive conduct. Matlock had grown increasingly fearful and anxious about her and her mother’s safety. Matlock sued Weets seeking a temporary and permanent injunction. The trial court issued a temporary injunction and set a hearing for a permanent injunction. The temporary injunction enjoined Weets from continuing his stalking behaviors and required Weets to stay more than 100 feet away from Matlock, her home, and her work. Weets violated the terms of the temporary injunction on four separate occasions. Following the hearing on a permanent injunction, the court granted Matlock’s request, restraining Weets in the same manner as the temporary injunction. Weets appealed, arguing that Matlock did not establish any actual confrontation between the two that placed Matlock’s physical safety at risk.