J.M. v. J.W.

On appeal, the defendants, J.W. and C.W., assert that a judge of the District Court erred in entering harassment prevention orders against them pursuant to G. L. c. 258E (258E orders).3 They argue that the plaintiff failed to establish three or more acts of harassment, as required by G. L. c. 258E, § 1. We agree and vacate both orders.

Background. The plaintiff and the defendants, a married couple, have been neighbors since 1990. On May 8, 2017, the plaintiff filed complaints for protection from harassment against both defendants. Following an evidentiary hearing on May 30, 2017, the judge…