DV Harassment Requires Purposeful Conduct – MJ v. GD (UNP)

[2/15/06 – 1:03 pm] In M.J. v. G.D., an UNPUBLISHED decision, the Appellate Division reverses a Family Court finding of domestic violence based upon the trial judge’s misunderstanding of the evidence needed to prove a charge of harassment under NJSA 2C:33-4. The Appellate Division ruled that although the defendant’s words were likely to cause annoyance or alarm, there was no evidence to suggest that he had such a purpose. Since the “purposeful” element had not been proved by a preponderance of the evidence, no restraining order should have been entered.

Download copy of the UNPUBLISHED decision in M.J. v. G.D.

Category: Muni-Mail Archive