C.R.S. v. J.M.S.

*1200*561The defendant appeals from the issuance of an abuse prevention order pursuant to G. L. c. 209A, arguing that both the ex parte order and the extended order after notice were wrongly issued.1 We affirm the order after notice and dismiss the appeal from the ex parte order as it has been superseded by the extended order after notice that was issued properly.

Background. On May 29, 2016, a District Court judge, on call for emergency matters, issued an emergency ex parte abuse prevention *562order (ex parte order) pursuant to G. L. c. 209A, § 5, ordering the defendant not to abuse the plaintiff;…