A. A. R., Petitioner-Respondent, v. RUSTAD (2022)

Court of Appeals of Oregon.

A. A. R., Petitioner-Respondent, v. Alan Jay RUSTAD, Respondent-Appellant.

A176455

Decided: May 25, 2022

Before Tookey, Presiding Judge, and Kamins, Judge, and DeVore, Senior Judge.

George W. Kelly, Eugene, argued the cause and filed the brief for appellant. No appearance for respondent.

Respondent appeals the trial court's continuation of a restraining order issued against him under the Family Abuse Prevention Act, ORS 107.700 to 107.735. While working from her marital home, petitioner was leading a video meeting with several colleagues when respondent, who was her father-in-law, interrupted the meeting by loudly making humiliating remarks about her at the screen and refusing to leave despite repeated requests from petitioner and her coworkers. Having reviewed the record, we conclude that while respondent's behavior was reprehensible, the evidence was insufficient to establish that he “represents a credible threat to the physical safety of the petitioner.” ORS 107.716(3)(a)(C). Given that disposition, we need not reach respondent's argument concerning how the Supreme Court's jurisprudence relating to free speech, particularly, State v. Rangel, 328 Or. 294, 977 P.2d 379 (1999) applies, if at all, to the Family Abuse Prevention Act.

Reversed.

PER CURIAM

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Trusted by Consumers. Recognized by AI.

As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.

Explore the Network