L.L. v. M.M.

*18After a hearing, a District Court judge denied the defendant's motion to terminate a permanent abuse prevention order issued pursuant to G. L. c. 209A (209A order).1 The defendant appeals, arguing that the judge abused his discretion because, in the defendant's view, he proved that there had been a significant change of circumstances and, as a result, the plaintiff no longer had a reasonable fear of physical harm from him. For *19that reason, he contends that it is no longer equitable for the 209A order to remain in place. We affirm.

Background. This case began with an emergency ex parte 209A…