CCP Section 527.6(i) “Prevailing Party” Language Is Broad, Rules the First District.
Code of Civil Procedure section 527.6(i) authorizes a discretionary award of attorney’s fees and court costs to the prevailing party in an action to obtain a TRO or preliminary injunction prohibiting harassment. The First District, Division 5 rebuffed a losing litigant’s argument that it was more limited in scope. In Wolff v. Kemp, Case No. A121169 (1st Dist., Div. 5 Mar. 4, 2009) (unpublished), plaintiff lost a request for an anti-harassment order under CCP section 527.6 and defendant was awarded $2,000 in fees under section 527.6(i). On appeal, plaintiff argued that an award under this provision was limited to instances in which a TRO issued without sufficient facts. Wrong, said the appellate panel. “Section 527.6, subdivision (i), however, contains no such limitation. Section 527.6 applies to actions seeking orders prohibiting harassment, whether it be a temporary restraining order or an injunction. Furthermore, the fact that the Judicial Council’s form answer referenced the issuance of a TRO is immaterial. The form language does not limit the statutory authority provided by section 527.6, subdivision (i).” The fee award was affirmed.
Civil Harassment .com
Stopping Abuse of Civil Harassment Restraining Order Law
Sidebar[Skip]
Defense against false Civil Harassment allegations
Notice of Non-Severability: this page is part of a whole work from which it may not be severed. Any construction of the meaning of any element on this page requires consideration of all other pages published as the whole work named www.civilharassment.com. Entire content of Legal Notice page and all other pages of www.civilharassment.com is expressly incorporated as part of this page.
Lobby to Reform
Public Policy
We are interested in your story and your restraining order and would be grateful to receive a copy of it (you may delete any personal references on the form). are compiling data to demonstrate that the Legislature's intent is not being followed by the trial courts. Examples include deletions from the restraining order forms approved by the California Judicial Council, such as the striking by the judge or commissioner of the mandatory firearms prohibition and the personal conduct and stay away orders, or the addition of "other orders" that limit your constitutional rights of free speech and petition or your real property rights.
Cameras and tripods are not weapons! — you lying idiots! — in Memoriam, Reuter's cameraman Namir Noor-Eldeen mistaken for man with a gun
Nothing contained herein is tendered as nor should it be considered as legal advice. What is legal is not necessarily justice. Almost all of reality is non-"published", ergo, what is legally affirmed is always a retarded misrepresentation of reality. Use at your own risk!