Guideline 2:06
No person seeking relief under c. 209A should be denied the right to file a complaint. Court personnel should treat a plaintiff with respect and courtesy, regardless of how many times the plaintiff has appeared before the court seeking relief and regardless of the outcome of any previous proceedings.
Each complaint must be evaluated on its own merits to determine whether evidence exists to support issuance of an abuse prevention order. The fact that a plaintiff has unsuccessfully sought relief previously, or has previously obtained abuse prevention orders but not sought to extend them, may be considered for context, but it is not relevant to the decision on the need for relief in response to the new complaint. See Guideline 3:08 Review of Prior Complaints.
Commentary
A plaintiff may initially seek relief, but then not appear at a subsequent hearing, request the order be terminated, or decide not to report violations of an order. Many complex dynamics contribute to this behavior. These can include the plaintiff’s need for financial support, a desire to reconcile with the defendant, coercion or intimidation by the defendant, family pressures, issues regarding children, and a plaintiff’s sense of heightened danger at the time of separation.
It is not uncommon, given these complex dynamics, that courts may see repetitious complaints. Instead of discouraging this behavior, judges and court staff should make sure that plaintiffs are aware that they are not precluded from returning to court to seek an order of protection and that relief is available through the Judicial Response System even if the court is closed.
Contact
Phone
Address
| Last updated: | October 20, 2025 |
|---|