Restraining order


January 14, 2009, 07:30 PM
I posted a while back that after 6 years since getting my record expunged and getting my Florida ccw and purchasing numerous firearms I was denied a purchase. Well I got my letter back from FDLE today and it says I have an active court order from 11 years ago. After giving all my guns to a relative I did some research and called an attorney in NJ it looks like I might be able to get it dissolved. Just a bunch more bullsh*T and money for some stupid crap years ago. According to this link my chances look good I've been sober for years have a good job that could be in jeapordy if upon my promotion to salaried manager they do an in depth backround check. Plus I've lived in Florida for the last ten years with roots and family here(no family left in NJ) Never contacted her after the order was done,besides that the whole thing was a sham to begin with. I believe the court would have a hard time believing that a threat still exists. :cuss:Wish me luck or else the 2nd amendment will just be a dream for me.

If you enjoyed reading about "Restraining order" here in archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join today for the full version!
January 14, 2009, 09:16 PM
Good Luck

Your a good man, being able to stay sober, getting your life turned around.

Keep it together.

January 15, 2009, 08:18 AM
What I find really strange is that I applied for my ccw and was approved and after all these years it all of a sudden pops back up on my record. When this happened the court gave me PTI which is an intervention where I complete a years worth of counseling and drug tests and they withhold judgement. I completed everything and was given a letter that all charges were dropped which I thought included the restraining order.

Old Fuff
January 15, 2009, 09:02 AM
What I find really strange is that I applied for my ccw and was approved and after all these years it all of a sudden pops back up on my record.

I have a friend that is having somewhat the same kind of trouble you are. It seems that the answer to your question is that there are all sorts of databases out there with this-or-that information on them. While they may all have some of the same information, they don't necessarily have ALL of the same information, and tracking down who-has-what is an impossible task because you have no way of finding out where all of these databases are.

So when you applied for a CCW the particular databases they checked didn't make any negative hits. But when you were trying to buy a firearm the information had been added to the NICS database by someone and it was updated. It probably came from a court or probation office. So you were turned down. Unfortunately the people in charge don't make any effort to find out if the data they receive is out-of-date and no longer valid.

Big brother is always watching you. It's for the children. :banghead:

January 15, 2009, 09:20 AM
If your record has been expunged, apply in NJ with the clerk of courts in the district that the case stems from to have whatever case is causing the trouble (I assume it is a DV case) and its disposition sealed. You will need to provide documentation that your record has ben expunged and having an attorney will help.

I am not a lawyer, nothing I say constitutes legal advice.

January 15, 2009, 10:25 AM
While they may all have some of the same information, they don't necessarily have ALL of the same information, and tracking down who-has-what is an impossible task because you have no way of finding out where all of these databases are.

This is because in most work is pieced out to different services. Some of these services (a large growing number) are in other countries like India where despite speaking English know little about American culture and laws (unless you think 24 and Lost are accurate representations) .

January 15, 2009, 10:45 AM
When one applies for an expunged, it applies only to the criminal charges. A TRO/FTO is not a charge but a court order. FRO's never sunset and remain in place indefinitely. Your entire DV history will remain in the database regardless of any expungements. In NJ you will be flagged as unable to purchase firearms. I don't believe any out of state agencies have access to the system which is on the NJ SCIC system. But now (I've been out for three years) they might be forwarded data to a central database.

You really need to consult a lawyer in NJ that is familiar with DV issues. Many are not that up on them as most lawyers don't want to handle them. I have no idea what it will take to have a FRO dismissed.

January 15, 2009, 02:28 PM
Just got off the phone with the lawyer and he said most likely this will be dismissed due to the fact that in the last 11 years I've had no contact,been in another state with absolutely no ties left to NJ been clean and sober,right after this happened in 1997 I reconciled with my wife and we will be married 17 years and have been at the same job for 10 years with excellent personnel reviews. Funny thing is my call was the 3rd one he received from FL this week from a person being denied a firearm purchase for a court order they didn't even know they had. He said it's possible either FL or NJ updated their database. Now all I need to do is come up with2500 dollars, there goes my bonus but at least it's for a good cause.

January 15, 2009, 03:19 PM
NJ has some pretty strange laws, and while I believe myself to be law abiding, they sure don't make it easy. I was once attacked by a neighbor and defended myself. Since we were both seen in a struggle we were both charged with misdemeanors. He was trying to kill me, just as he had done with countless others before. (Unfortunately a few years later he was more successful and killed two folks in a park.)

I needed to retain an attorney, pay to have my record expunged, and the only way I walked away without a "record" was by dropping charges against the would-be-killer. Only then, and if he dropped charges against me, would NJ drop charges against us. A real catch-22.

I wouldn't be surprised if I wouldn't be able to buy a gun in NJ. I'm glad not to find myself in that state.

January 15, 2009, 03:36 PM
Anyone interested in a collection of uncirculated morgan silver dollars:D Thats gonna be the first thing to go but it will be well worth it.

Master Blaster
January 15, 2009, 04:31 PM
While they may all have some of the same information, they don't necessarily have ALL of the same information, and tracking down who-has-what is an impossible task because you have no way of finding out where all of these databases are.

This is because in most work is pieced out to different services. Some of these services (a large growing number) are in other countries like India where despite speaking English know little about American culture and laws (unless you think 24 and Lost are accurate representations) .

Actually its because there are lots of rules regarding confidentiality of court and legal records. Especially where it applies to databases, they are somehow different than paper records in the courthouse with the same information. In my state I can go into the courthouse and see any paper record I want, but I cannot search the same records on the state's database. Then each court Superior, Family, Chancery, County, State , Local, Justice of the peace, has its own records and record system.

In some states.... you can get anything you want on a cd for a few dollars.

The real probolem is that we are required to go through all this nonsense for no reason at all.
Its really a small number of hardcore criminals responsible for 95% of the crime, and the system will miss the really crazy folks who are going off.

June 23, 2009, 10:16 PM
double tap

June 23, 2009, 10:20 PM
Just an update the retainer is paid and I spoke with the lawyer today she said they have 5 more of these cases pending and 4 of the last 5 have been dismissed and the one that wasn't was on that was only a year old,mine is 12 years old and I have a new life 1100 mile away so now all I do is pray I don't lose and have to appeal as it took 5 monthe to get the initial lawyers fees. It looks like I fit all the criteria

June 24, 2009, 11:34 AM
An 11 year old restraining order? How is it still active, I thought they ran out because they're a temporary thing. Of course, I'm not from NJ.

June 24, 2009, 12:55 PM
I believe NJ is 1 of 2 states that have whats called a final restraining order and they hand them out like candy up there thanks to Mr Lautenberg.

August 5, 2009, 05:18 PM
Lawyer called fromNJ yesterday and said Union county destroyed all the original transcripts from the restraining order hearings so now with no record of any testimony from either side I have to do this from memory. She also said with no transcripts the other party can walk into court and say whatever she wants in order to contest the revokation of the final order. I just hope that the NJ court has enough sense to see that a 12 year old order on a person 1100 miles away from me who I haven't seen or contacted in 12 years is'nt worth the paper it's written on.

August 5, 2009, 06:46 PM
If I were in your shoes, I think I'd talk to my lawyer about you writing a letter to the woman that originally requested the restraining order and then deliver the letter to your lawyer and see if he can facilitate getting it to the woman in question. Obviously a risky thing, so input from your lawyer is definitely required. Under no circumstances should you contact this woman on your own.

In the letter you should express sincere remorse for the situation that caused the restraining order (even if you don't feel any of it), don't admit to any crime of course, but talk about how your life has changed, how you've been married for x number of years, have x + y children, been sober/straight for x years, etc. and how you've moved on and you hope that she has as well, and bla bla bla. I would not mention guns at all - I'd mention that you want to get this restraining order removed because of your career and the possibility that it may be discovered in a background check and that you're concerned it may impact your career. And you have the opportunity for advancement in your career and it would mean a lot to your family - wife/children/etc. I'd also be very careful about NOT including any information where she can track you or your employer down - you really don't want to hear from her - but you do want her to think that this situation was the result of misguided passions, youth, whatever. And that you've moved on and hope she has as well and that you would be grateful if she would find it in her heart to help you in this matter, but no matter what, you respect her decision and are very sorry for the pain you've caused.

August 6, 2009, 08:05 PM
I'll have to wait for my lawyer to contact her. I hope the judge will see through all the bull listed on this restraining order. It has 12 of her family members and friends and 9 different addresses listed on it, strange thing is I've never even met all but 3 of these people and one of them was locked up in the Union county jail when these threats allegedly went down. The best thing that can happen now is for them to either be unable to locate her or if they do she refuses to come to the hearing. THIS IS A WARNING FOR ALL NJ RESIDENTS-IF YOU HAVE ANY TYPE OF DOMESTIC ISSUES WITH YOU'RE SIGNIFICANT OTHER RUN AS FAST AS YOU CAN FROM THE SITUATION UNTIL IT COOLS DOWN. ALL IT TAKES IS AN ACCUSATION TO END UP IN A SITUATION LIKE MINE.

August 6, 2009, 08:12 PM
I feel for you. I hope you get it gone for good. It used to be only wack-o lib places like NJ but this he said-she said gun confiscation crap is everywhere now. Thanks to New Jerkey's own Frank Lautenberg, social hypocrite elitist extraordinaire.

August 7, 2009, 01:45 AM
Good luck. I hope you get a fair honest judge, not some sham of a hearing. The Brady Bill, Lautenberg, etc. are a huge assault on the 2A. We need to unite against it!

August 7, 2009, 05:14 PM
Well here is the copy of the brief 1. I am the Defendant in the above captioned matter, and I make this certification in support of my application to Vacate the Final Domestic Violence Restraining Order entered in this matter on January 14, 1998. I have personal knowledge of all the facts set forth herein.
2. The age of the original Final Restraining Order proceeding makes it impossible to provide a complete record of the underlying proceedings. Attached, as Exhibit A, is a copy of the Final Restraining Order (FRO) entered against me. The tape recording of the proceeding is no longer available. My attorney has made a diligent inquiry with the clerk’s office to order a transcript of the proceeding but it was not available.
3. In lieu of a formal transcript, I will do my best to reconstruct the proceedings from my memory.
4. Unfortunately, since the hearing took place over eleven and a half years ago, I do not have a complete recollection of it. I was represented by counsel, Steven Altman, Esquire, from Edison, New Jersey. The Plaintiff appeared Pro Se. I recall that the Plaintiff took the witness stand and testified to the alleged offense, which was a terroristic threat. It is my recollection that her Complaint alleged that I had threatened to “get her and her husband,” and that I threatened to “kick her husband’s ass.” Upon the advice of counsel, I did not testify at the hearing. Neither the Plaintiff nor I presented any witnesses, and I do not believe there was any documentary evidence entered.
5. The Plaintiff and I were involved in a short-term dating relationship for approximately five months. The Plaintiff and I were co-workers at Distribution Management Group in Edison, New Jersey. We were both married to other persons at the time. I was temporarily separated from my wife, and the Plaintiff experienced marital difficulties as well. We had known each other for perhaps four to six months before we became involved in a dating relationship. The relationship ended at least one or two months before the occurrence of the incident, which constituted grounds for the Final Restraining Order. I was in the process of reconciling with my wife.
6. The alleged terroristic threats were made over the telephone while I was under the influence of alcohol and Xanax.
7. To the best of my recollection, there have never been any prior incidents of domestic violence between the Plaintiff and me. There have never been any physical acts of violence between us. The only incident I recall was a scuffle with the Plaintiff’s husband, whom she was separated from at the time and who was angry about our affair.
8. Shortly after the entry of the Final Restraining Order, I relocated to Florida, where I have been living with my wife since 1998.
9. At the time of the Final Restraining Order, I was twenty-eight (28) years old, and the Plaintiff was only twenty-six (26) years old. I will turn forty (40) on August 11 of this year.
10. Other than the short-term affair back in 1997, there are absolutely no ties between the Plaintiff and me. We do not have any children in common, do not own any property together, there is no support obligation due from one to the other, and no ties of any other nature exist.
11. The Plaintiff continues to reside in New Jersey, and I have had no contact with her since 1998. The last time I saw the Plaintiff was at my criminal trial, which stemmed from the same incident, and which took place a few months after the Final Restraining Order hearing (approx. May or June of 1998).
12. I bear no ill-will toward the Plaintiff, and I have long since moved on, being happily married to my wife for seventeen years now. Last year, I adopted my wife’s son from her prior relationship.
13. I have never violated the terms of the Final Restraining Order. As I have mentioned, I have had no contact whatsoever with the Plaintiff or any other individuals listed on the Final Restraining Order. In fact, I am not sure why there were as many as eight people listed on the Final Restraining Order, as I had only met three of them in person. I had never met the other individuals face-to-face. I had met the Plaintiff’s husband, Joseph ********, her brother, Jose, and our co-worker, Diane *******. The other individuals are the Plaintiff’s other brother, her two sisters, one of the sisters’ husband, and the Plaintiff’s husband’s brother. Again, I have never, ever met these individuals either before or after the entry of the Final Restraining Order.
14. As I have mentioned, the incident that resulted in the entry of the Final Restraining Order triggered criminal proceedings against me, in addition to the FRO. I entered into the Pre Trial Intervention program (PTI), which is designated for first time offenders, with the goal of rehabilitation. I successfully completed PTI after one year (see Exhibit B). I have undergone a successful alcohol and drug treatment in 2000, and have been, essentially, sober for almost nine years, except for a short relapse in 2006. Following the relapse, I immediately resumed treatment at the same facility, and have been sober ever since (see Exhibit C). I continue to attend AA meetings although, at this point, I do not have to go daily. I hereby attach a letter from my AA sponsor (see Exhibit D).
15. I do not suffer from any mental health conditions, and do not take any psychiatric medication. Back in 1998, when the alleged incident occurred, I was on Xanax for a short period of time. That was the most turbulent period of my life, when I was separated from my wife and engaged in an extra-marital affair with the Plaintiff.
16. Except for the Final Restraining Order, I have no criminal record, and I have not been arrested on any charges for the last eleven years.
17. I am almost forty years old, and generally of good health, although I have diabetes managed with medication, and I had two back surgeries last year, including a surgery on a fractured vertebrae in my neck and a herniated disc in my lower back.
18. For ______ years, I have been employed at Home Depot in ________, Florida. On July 31, 2009, I found out that my wife suffers from multiple sclerosis. Therefore, I resigned from the position of an hourly supervisor, as I do not believe I will be able to handle a highly demanding managerial position at this difficult time for our family. However, if I ever apply for a promotion, I will most likely be denied because my background check would reveal the existence of the Final Restraining Order from 1998. In fact, I was unaware that this Final Restraining Order was still on the record until I recently applied for a rifle permit in order to take my son hunting.
19. I have no intention of returning to New Jersey. A background check on me in Florida revealed the existence of this eleven (11) year old restraining order. It is no longer serving its intended purpose, but rather it exists merely to stigmatize me. I have no intention of contacting the Plaintiff or any other individual listed on the Final Restraining Order. I simply submit, in light of all the attendant facts and circumstances, that there is no need to continue this restraining order. Therefore, I respectfully request that the Court vacate the Final Restraining Order dated January 14, 1998.

August 8, 2009, 09:17 PM
Monday I'll be sending the letter from my AA sponsor after that I'm at the mercy of the superior court of Union County NJ.

August 8, 2009, 09:53 PM
If it were me...

I think I'd edit the post above to remove all of the names. What's going to happen when some joker somewhere that knows one of those people googles their name and comes up with this story? The person in the story is gonna hear about it. A 2 second google tells me where Joseph Torsiello can be found, as well as his son and somebody in his family that is a doctor in Midland Park NJ.

Also, did your lawyer suggest this format? Has the letter already gone out? I'm not sure I would have included some of the things that you did - not to alter history, but because the judge that will be reviewing this case will only know what you tell her about it since the records are lost. Yes, they may very well reach out to the opposing party to get their two cents, but you have the preemptive opportunity to set the stage. I think you could have told a better story with your letter, to be honest. There's not much in your letter that makes me, a non-biased third party, say "hmm, good point, let's vacate this order". Section 7 doesn't make me feel good at all. Section 13 is somewhat argumentative. What was the result of the criminal trial? Unless you were acquitted, the use of the word "alleged" throughout will not likely be viewed favorably by a judge.

6. The alleged terroristic threats were made over the telephone while I was under the influence of alcohol and Xanax.

You might as well have said "I made the threats while I was stoned." I'm not sure that this reference needed to be made at all. It makes it sound as if you are denying you said them by using alleged, yet six words later you say you were under the influence.

You might want to seek the advice of an attorney in NJ and one that routinely works with this particular court.

Good luck.

August 8, 2009, 10:21 PM
Best of luck. I worked with a guy who lost his job and his ability to posses a firearm due to a domestic situation and another who refused to protect himself from a potential situation. I feel for you, sir.

Tim the student
August 8, 2009, 10:32 PM
I think I'd edit the post to remove all of the names.

Yeah, I would do this right now. Like right now.

August 9, 2009, 08:11 AM
Dan brew It is a NJ lawyer who's handling it. If you look this link she followed all the guidelines. She included the fact that I was under the influence since I'm a recovering alcoholic and have since been sober maybe to show that had I been sober this would have never happened. She also said the biggest factor is the fact we were never married,the fact I live so far away and have no family ties to NJ anymore and a spotless criminal record since it happened. My absolute best shot is if they sent out copies of the motions and she chooses to ignore them and not respond to the request to mutually drop it or if NJ falls into the ocean in the next few months.:evil:

August 9, 2009, 08:20 AM
This one states previous cases on file
Your Honor:

Please accept this letter brief in lieu of a more formal brief in support of the Defendant’s motion for a dismissal of the Final Restraining Order in the above captioned matter.

Defendant shall rely upon the accompanying certification and attached exhibits in lieu of a more detailed statement of the facts herein.


Despite the fact that restraining orders in New Jersey are entitled “final” restraining orders, they are always subject to review and, ultimately, dissolution, upon the showing of good cause. Such dissolution, in practice, is liberally granted with the consent of the Plaintiff; however the consent of the Plaintiff is not a prerequisite to dissolution of a Final Restraining Order. Carfagno v. Carfagno, 288 N.J. Super. 424 (Ch. Div. 1995). Indeed, the Carfagno case sets forth a comprehensive review of the factors involved in determining whether a Final Restraining Order should be dismissed. The factors and a discussion of their relevance to the instant matter are set forth below:
1. Consent of Plaintiff to Lift the Order
The first factor is whether the Plaintiff consents to dissolve the Final Restraining Order. Where the Plaintiff has consented to lifting the restraining order and the Court finds that the Plaintiff is doing so voluntarily, the Court should dissolve the order without further consideration or analysis.
Here, to the Defendant’s knowledge, the Plaintiff’s consent is absent, but it is unknown whether she will object upon receipt of the within application. If, indeed, she objects, the Defendant asks that in evaluating this factor, consideration be given to the amount of time that has passed since the entry of the order, the fact that the parties have been completely out of contact, live in different states 1,500 miles away from each other, and have each moved on with their respective lives.
2. The Plaintiff's Fear of the Defendant
The Carfagno Court held that Courts should focus on objective fear. Carfagno v. Carfagno, 288 N.J. Super. 424, 437 (Ch. Div. 1995). The reasoning for this is that the Legislature provided that Final Restraining Orders may be dissolved, over the objection of the Plaintiff, upon good cause shown. N.J.S.A. 2C:25-29(d). The Legislature did not provide that permission of the Plaintiff is required before the Court can dissolve a Final Restraining Order. Subjective fear would merely be a surrogate for the Plaintiff’s consent. Therefore, when determining whether good cause exists to dissolve a restraining order, the Court should inquire into any statement of continued fear on the Plaintiff’s part to determine whether it is objectively reasonable. That is, would a reasonable Plaintiff, similarly situated, have fear of the Defendant under all of the attendant circumstances?
In the instant case, the eleven and one-half years which have passed without incident since the entry of the Final Restraining Order, compel the conclusion that a reasonable person would no longer harbor fear of the Defendant. In addition, the history of compliance with the order, the physical distance between the parties, the Defendant’s seventeen-year marriage to another person, his age, and his health condition all mitigate toward a finding that any residual fear of the Defendant strains credulity.
3. Nature of the Relationship Between the Parties Today
The third factor is the nature of the relationship between the parties today. Here the Court must look to determine whether the relationship today is one that would allow the Defendant to exercise control over the Plaintiff. Certainly, the existence of the restraining order can be said to have successfully broken any ingrained cycle of domestic violence in the parties’ relationship. Indeed the parties have had no contact at all for over eleven years. They do not have any children in common, do not own any property together, and are not tied by any support obligations. They have lived their separate lives over the past eleven years.
4. Contempt Convictions
The fourth factor is a consideration of the number of times that the Defendant has been convicted of contempt for violating the Final Restraining Order. The number of violations of the Final Restraining Order gives an indication that the Final Restraining Order is not totally effective in breaking the cycle of power and control exercised by the Defendant. Here there have been no violations. This fact mitigates toward dissolution.
5. Alcohol and Drug Involvement
The fifth factor involves a consideration of the involvement with drugs or alcohol in the matter. Here, the Defendant has successfully undergone alcohol and drug treatment, and has been sober for approximately nine years, except for a short relapse in 2006. The Defendant has broken his cycle of dependency on alcohol and drugs as is demonstrated by his extensive rehabilitation efforts through substance abuse treatment at _____________, and attendance at AA meetings. He is, unquestionably, committed to sobriety.
6. Other Violent Acts
The sixth factor is whether the Defendant has perpetrated violent acts upon the Plaintiff or other persons. Here, the Defendant has an otherwise clean record since the entry of the final restraining order to date. There was only one prior temporary restraining order back in 1990, which was voluntarily dismissed by the alleged victim. The complaint was lodged by the Defendant’s then girlfriend (not the Plaintiff) and arose from a dispute over custody of their child.
7. Whether Defendant Has Engaged in Domestic Violence Counseling
The seventh factor is whether the Defendant has engaged in domestic violence counseling, as counseling may be effective in breaking the cycle of power and control. While there had been no recent domestic violence counseling, the Defendant’s seventeen-year marriage to his present wife, and most recent adoption of her son, are a testament to his stability, and the eleven years intervening without incident between the entry of the restraining order and the present time is proof that he is not a recidivist.
8. Age/Health of Defendant
The eighth factor is the age and health of the Defendant. The Defendant is forty years old. He simply desires to live his life in Florida unfettered by the stigma of the existing restraining order. He has no plans to relocate or travel to New Jersey. He is diabetic and has had two recent surgeries. All of these factors mitigate toward dissolution of the restraining order.
9. Good Faith of Plaintiff
The next factor is the good faith of the Plaintiff in opposing the Defendant's request to dissolve the Final Restraining Order. This factor cannot be addressed unless and until the Plaintiff indicates opposition to this application.
10. Orders Entered by Other Jurisdictions
No such order exists. The subject New Jersey restraining order is the only relevant order at this time.
11. Other Factors Deemed Relevant by the Court
The Court also needs to consider any other factors raised by the parties which, based upon the evidence presented, may show that good cause exists to dissolve the restraining order. At the present time the Defendant reserves comment of any such factors until the Plaintiff sets forth her position.

The existing restraining order is no longer serving its intended purpose. It exists as only a stigma to the Defendant with no meaningful value, since the conditions which led to the conduct resulting in the entry of the order will not repeat themselves. The parties’ relationship is long over. They live in different states approximately 1,500 miles away from each other. Over eleven years have passed without incident. There are no financial or other ties between the parties of any nature. The confluence of all these factors demonstrates ample “good cause” for the involuntary dissolution of the restraining order.

Respectfully Submitted,


August 9, 2009, 12:00 PM
Good luck, do let us know what happens. :)

Dr. Tad Hussein Winslow
August 10, 2009, 12:04 PM
I am wishing you luck and wishing Frank Lautenberg an eternity of watching Gilligan's Island reruns.

Ditto. Except that looking at a young Dawn Wells for eternity is far far too kind of a fate for him. Make him watch Sex and the City reruns, and Ishtar & Battlefield Earth.

December 28, 2009, 07:56 PM
Danbrew you might want to edit the name out of your post as well.

December 28, 2009, 07:57 PM
To Home Depot George good luck. It seems like you have changed your ways and changed who you are. I feel it is silly to stigmatize you still for something that was so long ago.

December 28, 2009, 07:59 PM
This thread sums up the results but the judge did rule in my favor

December 28, 2009, 08:11 PM
Oh, and DEFINITELY Mary Ann. :)

December 28, 2009, 09:58 PM
Danbrew you might want to edit the name out of your post as well.

Yeah, should have - but, apparently, you can't edit posts after a certain amount of time...

If you enjoyed reading about "Restraining order" here in archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join today for the full version!