258E Guideline 7:00: Appeal

Part of the Guidelines of Judicial Practice: Harassment Prevention Proceedings.

Guideline 7:00

There is no provision in c. 258E for appeal by either party. However, the Supreme Judicial Court has ruled that litigants seeking appeals be directed to the Appeals Court.

A pending appeal does not deprive the trial court of its ability to modify or terminate an order.

Commentary

As with orders under c. 209A, judicial review of decisions regarding c. 258E orders is an appeal in the Appeals Court. See O’Brien v. Borowski, 461 Mass. 415, 418 (2012), citing Zullo v. Goguen, 423 Mass. 679, 681 (1996). “As a rule, a defendant who is the subject of an abuse prevention order issued ex parte at the commencement of an action brought under G.L. c. 209A may challenge the order at the ensuing hearing after notice – not by an appeal to an appellate court.” V.M. v. R.B., 94 Mass. App. Ct. 522, 522 (2018).

Massachusetts courts “apply the same principles to the question whether the appeal of an order under c. 258E is moot as the courts have applied with regard to orders under c. 209A.” Tom T. v. Lewis L., 97 Mass. App. Ct. 698, 701 (2020).

1. A harassment prevention order that is issued after a hearing after notice and simply expires is not moot and may be reviewed on appeal. See Seney v. Morhy, 467 Mass. 58, 62 (2014) (“appeals from expired harassment prevention orders, like appeals from expired abuse prevention orders, should not be dismissed as moot where the parties have a continuing interest in the case.”).
2. An order, whether ex parte or after a hearing after notice, that is terminated by a judge at a subsequent hearing is moot because the appellant has received all of the relief to which they are entitled. See Allen v. Allen, 89 Mass. App. Ct. 403, 405-406 (2016).
3. An ex parte order that is extended at a hearing after notice may not be reviewed independently because that ex parte order has been superseded by the order after notice. See Yahna Y. v. Sylvester S., 97 Mass. App. Ct. 184, 184 n.2 (2020); V.M. v. R.B., 94 Mass. App. Ct. 522, 524-525 (2018); C.R.S. v. J.M.S., 92 Mass. App. Ct. 561, 565 (2017).
4. If the order is terminated by a judge at the plaintiff's request, any appeal of that order is also moot because the court already has taken every action that the defendant could have sought on appeal. See Quinn v. Gjoni, 89 Mass. App. Ct. 408, 414 (2016)

Despite any limitation on a party’s right to appeal, if either party seeks to pursue an appeal, the clerk’s office should be prompt in complying with Massachusetts Rules of Appellate Procedure 8 and 9 when assembling the record on appeal. See Allen v. Allen, 89 Mass. App. Ct. 403, 403 (2016) (motion to dismiss appeal resolved by the Appeals Court).

The Trial Court need not seek leave from the appellate court to modify or terminate a pending order. See Quinn v. Gjoni, 89 Mass. App. Ct. 408, 411 (2016). “Of course, litigants should keep appellate courts apprised of any relevant ongoing proceedings.” Id.

Last updated:	October 20, 2025