Hey everyone, quick question… if someone files a second TRO just a week after the first one was filed, could that be seen as an abuse of process? I’m wondering if the second TRO could be considered retaliatory if there’s no real evidence to back it up. Any thoughts or experiences with this?
Hmm, if there’s no real evidence for the second TRO, it definitely seems like it could be considered retaliatory. Courts usually look at whether the second TRO is backed by something solid or if it’s just an attempt to get back at the petitioner.
@Remy
Yeah, exactly! If the petitioner doesn’t have any proof, it probably won’t fly in court. They could even get the case dismissed.
Quince said:
@Remy
Yeah, exactly! If the petitioner doesn’t have any proof, it probably won’t fly in court. They could even get the case dismissed.
Right, that makes sense. So basically, no evidence = it could get dismissed and maybe even cause some trouble for the petitioner? 
If the second TRO is filed without a real basis, then yes, it’s likely to be considered retaliatory. It could backfire, especially if there’s nothing to support it.
Zev said:
If the second TRO is filed without a real basis, then yes, it’s likely to be considered retaliatory. It could backfire, especially if there’s nothing to support it.
Got it. So I guess the main thing is whether they have solid evidence or not. Makes sense. Thanks for the clarity!
If there’s actual evidence, then it wouldn’t be retaliation. But if not, they might have a hard time convincing the court that it’s necessary.
Bran said:
If there’s actual evidence, then it wouldn’t be retaliation. But if not, they might have a hard time convincing the court that it’s necessary.
Yeah, exactly. It’s all about the evidence. If they have nothing to show for it, the court could dismiss it and even order them to cover your attorney’s fees.
Honestly, it sounds like it could be a strategic move if they don’t have any evidence. If it’s just to get back at the petitioner, it could fall apart in court.
jurisnest said:
Honestly, it sounds like it could be a strategic move if they don’t have any evidence. If it’s just to get back at the petitioner, it could fall apart in court.
Yep, that’s usually how these things go. It could end up costing the person filing the second TRO if it’s deemed retaliatory.
So basically, if the second TRO is just to retaliate, the court might dismiss it and even award costs and fees, right? Could be a good strategy to counter it.
Dakota said:
So basically, if the second TRO is just to retaliate, the court might dismiss it and even award costs and fees, right? Could be a good strategy to counter it.
Exactly, if there’s no evidence to support it, you could push for dismissal and even ask for damages. It could really backfire for them.