N. F. M. v. Khalidi

ORS 107.716(3)(a) permits continuation of a restraining order if “petitioner reasonably fears for the petitioner’s physical safety” and “respondent represents a credible threat to the physical safety of the petitioner or the petitioner’s child.”

Respondent appealed the trial court’s decision to continue a restraining order. Respondent assigned error to the trial court’s finding that Petitioner feared for her safety and that Respondent was a credible threat. The Court of Appeals reviewed for evidence that the restraining order should be continued. Respondent argued on appeal that he was not a credible threat by contesting Petitioner’s version of events. Respondent also argued that his violations of the order, prior to the hearing, were nonviolent so there was no threat against Petitioner’s physical safety. ORS 107.716(3)(a) permits continuation of a restraining order if “petitioner reasonably fears for the petitioner’s physical safety” and “respondent represents a credible threat to the physical safety of the petitioner or the petitioner’s child.” The Court held that Respondent and his witnesses were not credible. Therefore, the Court found that there was nothing to contradict Petitioner’s description of her physical abuse. Finally, the Court held that the prolonged abuse, threats of further abuse, and the knowing violation of the order were all credible evidence to support a continuation under ORS 107.716(3)(a). Affirmed.