Legal Opinion

Mummert v. Tanner

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided September 24, 2014No. 110506910; A149428Published

1Per curiam

In the trial court, petitioner obtained a stalking protective order (SPO) against respondent pursuant to ORS 30.866. Respondent appeals, asserting that petitioner failed to carry her burden of presenting sufficient evidence to prove that the statutory prerequisites for an SPO were met. We agree and reverse.

Under ORS 30.866, a court may issue an SPO against a person if (1) the person “intentionally, knowingly or recklessly engages in repeated and unwanted contact with [another] person or a member of that person’s immediate family or household thereby alarming or coercing the other person,” (2)…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. State v. RangelOregon Supreme Court · 1999
  2. State v. MoyleOregon Supreme Court · 1985
  3. Langford v. LangfordCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2014

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API