If the restraining order is against the Petitioner (as in a case where there are counter-petitions), the Petitioner may be arrested by any sheriff's office.Additional: In FL, even if no counter-petition has been sought or awarded, the petitioner is bound by the same restrictions as have been placed against the respondant. As stated above, the petitioner CAN be arrested for violating the provisions their own restraining order. The petitioner cannot use their order as a weapon against the respondant.
Question is not really worded clearly. However - the same order that prevents the respondant from contacting the petitioner also protects the respondant from being contacted by the petitioner. THey are in equal violation and can be sanctioned by the court that issued the order. The petitioner can NOT contact and harass the respondant just because the petitioner thinks they are 'protected.' However, even if the petitioner can be proven to be violating the divorce decree that is a separate issue from the protection order which will have to be handled as a contempt matter.
definitely notANOTHER VIEW: The first answer is incorrect! The petitioner (the one who sought the restraining order) is bound by the same restrictions as the respondant (the one against whom the petition was issued). For example: if there is a 500 foot keep-away restriction on the respondant, the petitioner is also prohibited from going within 500 feet of the respondant.
The courts issued restraining orders at the request of the party who requests it. If that petitioner then turns around and WILLINGLY weds the respondant it would appear to nullify, by their own choice, the court order.
The Petitioner is the one that files the claim or call for action & the respondent is the one that the claim is against or the opponent.
More commonly referred to as a "restraining order" or a "no-cointact order." It is an order issued by the civil court at the request of the petitioner, if they can show sufficient legal grounds to be protected, from the unwanted advances of the respondant, against whom the order is issued. It is a valid court order and a violater of it can either be arrested and/or cited for contempt of court.
It depends on the judge's ruling in the decree. In the absence of the respondant they may award it all to the petitioner - OR they may rule that a certain amount of the marital assets be escrowed for a certain length of time until all legal efforts to to find the respondant are exhausted.
no the restraining order is in effect the second the judge signs it. but a good thing to keep in mind is if you and the defendant are in the room together and the judge signs the order it is in effect but he is allowed to break the order due to the court proceeding you are undergoing. but once you two leave the court room he/she must then follow the order or go to jail.Another View: The order does NOT take effect unless, and until, it is served on the respondant. Until then the respondant can legally claim "no knowledge" of the existence of the order. Avoidance of service is actually a fairly common method of avoiding the restrictions of the order.
The correct spelling is respondent.
How can you proceed with a civil suit with only one side present? It greatly depends on how the judge views the situation. If you filed a civil suit BUT NEVER SERVED THE RESPONDANT just how did you expect the respondant to know about the case and show up in court. On the day of the case when you, your attorney and the judge show up - the judge may well consider that you abused not only HIS time but the court's time as well, he quite possibly MIGHT find you in contempt of court and fine you.