My client, the victim, is 18 and her father is the defendant. She obtained the TRO against her father upon an act of assault (no injuries).  There is a significant history of abuse that predates her 18th birthday.  Unfortunately, the TRO does not include those allegations of abuse since they occurred before she was 18 and are covered by Title 9.  No DCPP action was taken during this period.

------------------------------
Rachel Cotrino Esq.
Jackson NJ
(732)987-9966
------------------------------

I should add that I sent the client to amend the prior acts with the incidents that occurred when she was a minor and the Hearing Officer flat out refused.

------------------------------
Rachel Cotrino Esq.
Jackson NJ
(732)987-9966

Original Message:
Sent: 01-06-2016 15:52
From: Rachel Cotrino
Subject: TRO with Past History that occurred when that party was a minor

My client, the victim, is 18 and her father is the defendant. She obtained the TRO against her father upon an act of assault (no injuries).  There is a significant history of abuse that predates her 18th birthday.  Unfortunately, the TRO does not include those allegations of abuse since they occurred before she was 18 and are covered by Title 9.  No DCPP action was taken during this period.

I was thinking of making an oral motion on the record to amend the TRO to include the prior acts since the Court has to consider ALL the history.

 

Are there any other arguments I should make here?

 

Thanks,

 

------------------------------
Rachel Cotrino Esq.
Jackson NJ
(732)987-9966
------------------------------

The NJPDVA contains, in effect, a statutory exception to NJRE 404 propensity strictures, as expressly anticipated in 101(a)(2)(B).

------------------------------
Curtis Romanowski Esq.
Senior Attorney - Proprietor
Metuchen NJ
(732)603-8585

Original Message:
Sent: 01-06-2016 16:21
From: Rachel Cotrino
Subject: TRO with Past History that occurred when that party was a minor

I should add that I sent the client to amend the prior acts with the incidents that occurred when she was a minor and the Hearing Officer flat out refused.

------------------------------
Rachel Cotrino Esq.
Jackson NJ
(732)987-9966

Original Message------

The NJPDVA contains, in effect, a statutory exception to NJRE 404 propensity strictures, as expressly anticipated in 101(a)(2)(B).

------------------------------
Curtis Romanowski Esq.
Senior Attorney - Proprietor
Metuchen NJ
(732)603-8585
------------------------------

Original Message------

Your client should go to the DV office to file an Amended complaint which must be served on the defendant before the final hearing.

Debra Schneider
411 Hackensack. Ave
Hackensack,NJ

Original Message------

I should add that I sent the client to amend the prior acts with the incidents that occurred when she was a minor and the Hearing Officer flat out refused.

------------------------------
Rachel Cotrino Esq.
Jackson NJ
(732)987-9966
------------------------------

Original Message------

My client, the victim, is 18 and her father is the defendant. She obtained the TRO against her father upon an act of assault (no injuries).  There is a significant history of abuse that predates her 18th birthday.  Unfortunately, the TRO does not include those allegations of abuse since they occurred before she was 18 and are covered by Title 9.  No DCPP action was taken during this period.

I was thinking of making an oral motion on the record to amend the TRO to include the prior acts since the Court has to consider ALL the history.

 

Are there any other arguments I should make here?

 

Thanks,

 

------------------------------
Rachel Cotrino Esq.
Jackson NJ
(732)987-9966
------------------------------

I agree with Hannan, but before doing so, I think there's another step you should take first. You indicated that the hearing officer refused to permit her to amend the complaint to include acts that occurred before she was 18. As we all know, some hearing officers are great, others..... I have had two cases that were listed for trial only to end into terminations that the allegations of the complaint never should have resulted in the entry of the TRO. Of course, by that point, my clients had been removed from their homes and separated from their kids for over a week, and had to incur the cost of retaining counsel. I wonder if it's the same hearing officer?

In any case, your client has the right to appeal the denial of any hearing officer determination to a judge. Your client needs to respectfully request this. Or, better yet, since she has already been to a hearing officer, perhaps you could write to the presiding judge and advise as to the situation and request that your client be permitted to appear directly before I judge upon her return to the courthouse today?

-DPD-

Sent from my iPad

------------------------------
_______________________

David Perry Davis, Esq.
112 West Franklin Avenue
Pennington, NJ 08534
www.FamilyLawNJ.pro
Voice: 609-737-2222
Fax: 609-737-3222
_______________________

Original Message:
Sent: 01-07-2016 07:53
From: Hanan Isaacs
Subject: TRO with Past History that occurred when that party was a minor

Rachel I don't know the law on that. My gut is to say that is a constitutional and statutory violation. A DV victim should not be disabled from offering relevant proofs of a DV history based on her prior status as a minor. Moreover, the defendant is constitutionally and statutory entitled to notice and an opportunity to defend. If I were you, I would file a formal motion to amend. If denied, I would request a stay and file an interlocutory appeal. Hanan

Original Message------

My client, the victim, is 18 and her father is the defendant. She obtained the TRO against her father upon an act of assault (no injuries).  There is a significant history of abuse that predates her 18th birthday.  Unfortunately, the TRO does not include those allegations of abuse since they occurred before she was 18 and are covered by Title 9.  No DCPP action was taken during this period.

I was thinking of making an oral motion on the record to amend the TRO to include the prior acts since the Court has to consider ALL the history.

 

Are there any other arguments I should make here?

 

Thanks,

 

------------------------------
Rachel Cotrino Esq.
Jackson NJ
(732)987-9966
------------------------------