If you have a Temporary Restraining Order against your spouse in New Jersey, you may hear the term "civil restraints" before your Final Restraining Order hearing.
What does that mean? And should you consider dismissing a TRO in exchange for civil restraints?
The answer depends entirely on your circumstances, because civil restraints and a domestic violence restraining order are not the same thing.
When a TRO is issued in a New Jersey domestic violence case, the court schedules a hearing to determine whether a Final Restraining Order should be entered.
At that hearing, both sides have an opportunity to present their evidence. The judge then determines whether the legal requirements for a Final Restraining Order have been established.
If an FRO is entered, it can provide significant protections, including prohibiting contact, keeping the defendant away from certain locations, addressing possession of the home, and, depending on the circumstances, addressing temporary custody, support, parenting time, and other issues.
An FRO in New Jersey also does not simply expire after a certain amount of time. It remains in effect unless the court later dismisses or changes it.
In some cases, the parties may discuss resolving their dispute without proceeding to a contested Final Restraining Order hearing.
That's where civil restraints may come into the conversation.
Civil restraints are generally agreements or orders entered in a family-law matter that establish boundaries between the parties. Depending on the agreement, they might address communication, contact between the spouses, possession of the home, or other conduct while the parties remain separated or proceed with their divorce.
But here's the important part:
Civil restraints do not provide the same protections or enforcement mechanisms as a Final Restraining Order under New Jersey's domestic violence laws.
That difference needs to be taken very seriously.
There are cases where both parties want clear boundaries but decide, after receiving legal advice, that resolving the dispute through agreed civil restraints makes sense.
For example, the spouses may already be living separately and may want an enforceable agreement governing contact and communication while their divorce proceeds.
But civil restraints should never be treated as an automatic compromise where everybody "wins."
If someone genuinely needs the protections of a Final Restraining Order, giving up the opportunity to seek that order simply to avoid a hearing can have serious consequences.
One of the biggest distinctions involves enforcement.
Violations of certain provisions of a domestic violence restraining order can lead to criminal contempt proceedings. New Jersey law also provides a minimum jail term of at least 30 days for a second or subsequent conviction for certain nonindictable domestic-violence contempt offenses.
Civil restraints don't automatically carry those same domestic-violence enforcement consequences.
That is one reason you need to understand exactly what protection you're giving up before agreeing to dismiss a TRO.
There is no universal answer.
If you're considering dismissing a Temporary Restraining Order in exchange for civil restraints, speak privately with an experienced New Jersey family-law attorney about what happened, whether you continue to fear future abuse, what protections you currently have, and exactly what the proposed civil restraints would provide.
Don't agree to civil restraints simply because you feel pressured to avoid a Final Restraining Order hearing.
Sometimes civil restraints may be an appropriate resolution. Sometimes the protections of an FRO are necessary.
The difference matters.
Until next time,
Steve