BLACKOWL LAW
A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION
← FAMILY LAW
GUIDE · RESTRAINING ORDERS

Domestic violence
restraining orders.

If you or your children are in immediate danger, call 911 first. Then read this.

Getting protected

Emergency protective orders are available 24/7.

Law enforcement can obtain an EPO from an on-call judge at any hour. It lasts only a handful of days — long enough to get to court and ask for a temporary restraining order yourself.

A temporary order can issue the same day you ask.

A TRO is decided on your written request, often without the other party present, and stays in place until a hearing — typically within about three weeks. That hearing is where a longer order, up to five years, is decided.

A DVRO does more than order someone to stay away.

It can require an abuser to move out of a shared home, set temporary custody and visitation, order support, grant use of a vehicle or pet, and require the surrender of firearms.

What matters at the hearing

Specific incidents beat general fear.

Dates, what was said, what was done, who saw it, what you did afterward. Abuse includes threats, harassment, stalking, and coercive control — not only physical violence — but it has to be described concretely.

Evidence you already have.

Photographs, texts and voicemails, medical records, police report numbers, and witnesses. Preserve messages rather than deleting them, however much you want them gone.

The custody consequences are significant.

A DV finding creates a presumption against awarding custody to the restrained parent, and weighs against them on spousal support. This is why these hearings are contested hard, and why the presentation matters.

If an order is sought against you

Do not ignore it, and do not violate it.

A restraining order against you can cost you your home, your firearms, your custody, and — if you are licensed or hold certain jobs — your livelihood. Violating it is a separate crime, even if the protected person invited the contact.

You have a right to be heard.

The hearing is your opportunity to respond with evidence, not just denials. Requests are sometimes brought for tactical advantage in a custody case; showing that takes preparation, not indignation.

When a restraining order and criminal charges run together

The same incident can produce a family-court restraining order and a criminal prosecution at the same time. They are separate cases, on separate calendars, with separate judges — and what you do in one can decide the other.

Two orders, two courts.

The criminal court will usually issue its own protective order at arraignment. It is not the same document as the family-court DVRO, and it may have different terms — a no-contact criminal order can be stricter than a family order that allows peaceful contact for custody exchanges. When the two conflict, the more restrictive one controls. You are expected to comply with both.

Anything you say in family court can be used against you.

Your responsive declaration, your testimony at the DVRO hearing, and your statements in mediation are all available to the prosecutor. Testifying to defend your family case can hand the district attorney the admission it lacked. This is the central tension of a parallel case, and it is why the two matters have to be strategized as one.

Continuances, and why they are sometimes right.

Where the Fifth Amendment problem is real, the restrained party can ask the family court to continue the hearing until the criminal case resolves, with the temporary order remaining in place. Judges often grant it. The cost is living under the temporary order longer; the benefit is not testifying while charges are pending.

A criminal conviction changes the custody analysis.

A domestic violence conviction within the last five years triggers a statutory presumption against awarding custody to the convicted parent. A DVRO finding does the same. Either one can also mean a batterer's intervention program, firearms relinquishment, and immigration consequences that outlast both cases.

If you are the protected party.

You do not control the criminal case — the district attorney does, and it can proceed even if you ask that it not. Your family case is where you have standing: custody, support, exclusive use of the home, and the terms of the order itself. Dropping the DVRO does not drop the charges.

The criminal side is covered in our domestic violence guide.

Who pays the attorney fees

Restraining order cases are one of the few places in family law where winning shifts your fees to the other side. Family Code § 6344 was rewritten effective January 1, 2023, and the rule is deliberately asymmetrical.

A prevailing petitioner is entitled to fees.

On request, after notice and a hearing, the court shall order the restrained party to pay a prevailing petitioner's attorney fees and costs. This is no longer discretionary and no longer need-based — the petitioner does not have to show that they cannot afford their own lawyer. The only gate is that the court must first find under § 270 that the party ordered to pay has, or is reasonably likely to have, the ability to pay.

A prevailing respondent has a much harder road.

Defeating a request does not, by itself, entitle you to fees. The court may award them only if the respondent proves by a preponderance of the evidence that the petition was frivolous or solely intended to abuse, intimidate, or cause unnecessary delay — and the petitioner must also have the ability to pay. The Legislature did not want the risk of a fee award deterring people from seeking protection.

The general family-law fee statutes still apply.

Where the parties are also in a divorce, parentage, or custody case, need-based fees under §§ 2030 and 7605 and sanctions under § 271 are separately available. A respondent who cannot meet the frivolousness standard may still have a need-based claim in the underlying case.

You still have to ask.

The statute is mandatory only "upon request." A request in writing is best, but made orally at the hearing it counts. Support it with a declaration of hours and rates and with income information for the other side, since ability to pay has to be found before anything is ordered. Fee awards are routinely lost by parties who won the hearing and never asked.

THE AUTHORITY

The Domestic Violence Prevention Act, and the cases that define how these hearings are actually run.

Fam. Code § 6320
A court may enjoin contact, harassment, stalking, and disturbing the peace, including coercive control; protected persons can include family or household members — and pets. Effective January 1, 2026, reproductive coercion is named in the statute as an example of coercive control.
Fam. Code § 6345
Orders may issue for up to five years, and on renewal for another five years or permanently.
Fam. Code § 3044
A finding of domestic violence within the previous five years creates a rebuttable presumption against awarding sole or joint custody to the perpetrator. The version operative January 1, 2026 also lets the court weigh a party’s violation of firearm restrictions.
Cooper v. Bettinger (2015) 242 Cal.App.4th 77
The moving party must prove abuse by a preponderance of the evidence.
Marriage of D.S. & A.S. (2023) 87 Cal.App.5th 926
Where material facts are in dispute, the court must hold a hearing and make credibility findings — denying one is a denial of due process.
Fam. Code § 6305
Where both parties seek orders, the court may not issue mutual orders unless it makes detailed findings of fact — including a determination of which party was the primary aggressor and that neither acted primarily in self-defense.
Isidora M. v. Silvino M. (2015) 239 Cal.App.4th 11
Mutual restraining orders require that both parties actually request relief; a criminal protective order against one party is not a substitute.
J.J. v. M.F. (2014) 223 Cal.App.4th 968
Defines “primary aggressor” in the mutual-order context: the court must weigh the larger history of the relationship, not the incident in isolation.
Melissa G. v. Raymond M. (2018) 27 Cal.App.5th 360
Two orders arising from separate incidents are still mutual orders, and issuing them without the required findings is error.
Nevarez v. Tonna (2014) 227 Cal.App.4th 774
A single past act of abuse supports an order; the court need not find that future abuse is likely.
Marriage of F.M. v. M.M. (2021) 65 Cal.App.5th 106
Separation is not a reason to deny an order, post-filing abuse must be heard, and the petitioner’s testimony alone can carry the burden.
Faton v. Ahmedo (2015) 236 Cal.App.4th 1160
A fee request is not waived by leaving it out of the initial application, and need not be decided with the petition itself.
Br. C. v. Be. C. (2024) 101 Cal.App.5th 259
Penal Code § 633.6 permits a victim to record confidential communications from a perpetrator where they intend to seek a restraining order and reasonably believe the recording is germane — even before a petition is filed.
Fam. Code § 6306
The court must run a criminal records search before ruling, absent undue administrative burden.

Authorities current as of 2026. Case law changes; nothing here is a substitute for advice on your own facts.

EVERY CASE IS DIFFERENT

Get answers about your situation.

This guide is general information — a consultation is where it becomes advice.

★ ★ ★ ★ ★  5.0 ON AVVO · 23 CLIENT REVIEWS
60-MINUTE CONSULTATIONS
BOOK ONLINE CALL OR TEXT OFFICE (916) 900-2425 CALL OR TEXT ATTORNEY CELL (916) 900-6917
BLACKOWL LAW, P.C.
1264 Hawks Flight Ct, Ste 200, El Dorado Hills, CA 95762
Admin (916) 900-2425 · Attorney (916) 900-6917 — call or text · Fax (916) 244-4858 · sage@blackowl.law
© 2026 BlackOwl Law, P.C. · Sage BlackOwl, CA State Bar No. 296690
Attorney Advertising · Privacy · Accessibility