R.G was the attorney-in-fact and primary caregiver for his parents. After R.G.’s mother fell ill, R.G. wanted to place his mother in a nursing home. R.G’s brother objected to this plan, but R.G. went ahead and had his mother admitted to a nursing home without his brother’s consent. R.G.’s brother sent angry and threatening texts and emails to R.G. as well as emails expressing his desire to find a way to care for their parents in their home. Eventually the men got into a physical altercation in which R.G.’s brother shoved R.G.
R.G. filed for a restraining order against his brother under the Prevention of Domestic Violence Act. The trial judge ruled that R.G. was harassed and assaulted and issued the restraining order. R.G.’s brother appealed, arguing that R.G. did not meet the definition of a victim of domestic violence.
The New Jersey Superior Court, Appellate Division, reverses, holding that R.G.’s brother’s actions did not amount to domestic violence. The court finds that there was insufficient evidence that R.G.’s brother purposely acted to harass R.G., ruling that “a mere expression of anger between persons in a requisite relationship is not an act of harassment.”
For the full text of this decision, go to: http://njlaw.rutgers.edu/collections/courts/appellate/a0945-15.opn.html