Case Alert: G.G. v. G.S. (2024)

This case explains: 

• This is the first case to say that more incidents of abuse, and more evidence of abuse, can be brought up at the DVRO renewal hearing. This includes abuse and evidence that could’ve been, but wasn’t, brought up at the original DVRO hearing. For example, in this case, at her DVRO renewal hearing G.G. talked about the abuse and evidence of G.S. “manhandling” her, which she hadn’t brought up in her initial DVRO hearing before.
• This case helps explain how important DVROs are for protecting survivors because domestic violence is one of the most serious risks to women’s health. This case explains: “[T]he more comprehensive an order can be, and the longer it remains in place, the better the odds that the abuse will end.” 
• This case reminds trial courts that nonphysical abuse needs to be taken just as seriously as physical abuse. Stalking, for example, needs to be taken very seriously because it has many lasting effects on survivors. And stalking a strong predictor of future abuse, including physical or deadly abuse.
• This case helps explain how the court should use the three steps outlined in the Ritchie v. Konrad (2004) 115 Cal.App.4th 1275 case to decide a DVRO renewal request, when it’s disputed:
  • Step 1: What led to the initial DVRO in the first place? The abuse and other facts that led to the DVRO “often will be enough” to get the renewal. This is true even if the original abuse wasn’t physical. 
  • Step 2: Have things changed? If things are the same or worse, the DVRO needs to continue. If things have gotten better, the DVRO may still need to continue, unless things are so much better that the DVRO’s no longer needed. ▪ For part of this Step 2, the trial court can look at whether the DVRO has been violated or not. A renewal can’t be denied just because the DVRO hasn’t been violated. If the DVRO hasn’t been violated, the order has been working and arguably should be renewed. If the DVRO has been violated, the order should arguably still be renewed. 
  • Step 3: Would the DVRO burden the restrained party? ***This Step 3 should be skipped if the abuse in the case is physical.*** If the abuse is not physical, like nonphysical stalking, the court can look at any actual burdens the DVRO causes the restrained party. It’s up to the restrained party to show actual burdens, if any. ▪ This doesn’t mean the protected party has to show more to get their renewal. It only means the restrained party can discuss the burdens of the DVRO on them if the abuse is nonphysical.