Court Addressed The Appealability Of Domestic Violence Injunctions

Maryland domestic violence protective orders are powerful civil injunctions intended to prevent domestic violence and ensure the safety of victims. These orders can be significant, so it is not surprising that the consequences of these orders prompt appellate review when the aggrieved party feels that the order was entered improperly. In this case, the Maryland high court ruled on a significant procedural issue, where the court determined whether or not a party could appeal a domestic violence protective order after giving their consent to the order. 

Background of the case 

The case was governed by the Maryland Protection from Domestic Violence Act. The petitioner was granted a final protective order against the respondent by the District Court of Maryland. Instead of denying the charges in a full evidentiary hearing, the respondent agreed to the entry of the final protective order.

However, the respondent later tried to appeal the decision of the District Court to the Circuit Court for a de novo hearing. Under Maryland law, a final protective order issued by the District Court can be appealed to the Circuit Court.

The petitioner filed a motion to dismiss the appeal on the ground that the respondent, having consented to the entry of the protective order, waived his right to appeal. There was a conflict in the decisions of the lower courts on the issue of whether the consent order waived the right to appeal a final protective order. 

The appeal 

The Court of Appeals was concerned with the legal implications of consent judgments. The court stated that, as a general rule, consent judgments are not appealable because they reflect the voluntary consent of all parties.

The respondent argued that protective orders ought to be an exception because of the severe consequences of an order and the right to appeal granted under the Family Law Article. However, the Court disagreed with the argument of the respondent and held that the appeal right provided under the law does not override the general principle that consent to judgment waives the right to appeal.

The court stated that consent to judgment must be free from fraud and coercion. Thus, if the respondent could prove that consent was obtained via fraud or coercion, there would be an opportunity to appeal the judgment. However, in the absence of such facts, consent is binding.

The court held that the respondent was not entitled to appeal de novo in the Circuit Court and that the appeal was properly dismissed. 

Talk to a Bel Air, MD, Family Law Attorney Today 

Schlaich & Thompson, Chartered, represents the interests of Bel Air, MD, residents who are going through divorce. Call our Bel Air family lawyers today to schedule an appointment, and we can begin discussing your next steps right away.

Source:

caselaw.findlaw.com/court/md-court-of-appeals/1225082.html