Legal Opinion
O'KANE v. Irvine
California Court of Appeal
Decided July 5, 1996No. A069552PublishedCited by 20 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
PARRILLI, J.
Mark Irvine appeals the domestic violence prevention order restraining him from coming within 100 yards of respondent Kerri O’Kane 1 or her residence. Irvine contends the court had no jurisdiction to issue the order as O’Kane did not establish that she is a protected person under the Domestic Violence Prevention Act (Act). (Fam. Code, 2 § 6200 et seq.). Specifically, Irvine submits that O’Kane cannot be considered a “cohabitant” within the meaning of sections 6209 and 6211. We have determined Irvine’s appeal is meritorious and, accordingly, reverse the judgment.
Factual and…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Moyer v. Workmen's Compensation Appeals BoardCalifornia Supreme Court · 1973
- California Teachers Ass'n v. San Diego Community College DistrictCalifornia Supreme Court · 1981
- Delaney v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1990
- People v. WeidertCalifornia Supreme Court · 1985
- T. M. Cobb Co. v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1984
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by20 opinions
- State v. WilliamsOhio Supreme Court · 1997
- County of Fresno v. SheltonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1998
- Good v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2008
- WATERSHED ENFORCERS v. Department of Water ResourcesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2010
- State v. WilliamsOhio Supreme Court · 1997
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.