Weiner v. Weiner

899 N.Y.S.2d 555 (2010)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

Just by pure 'coincidence' H rented a house in W's development, the Hideout on the very same day that an order of protection expired. Of all the houses that were available he chose one right behind W's house, separated from it by only a narrow corridor of woods. A short walk through the woods would bring H to the edge of her back lawn where he could stand and stare into her home--under the cover of darkness or hidden by the trees--seeing what she is doing, what she is wearing, who she is with. W had obtained a protective order after their divorce. Almost from the moment, the divorce was granted, He began barraging her with telephone calls, letters, and cards. All of these communications--bitter, mocking and nasty in tone--were to the effect that he would never let her go and that she would always be under his control. W decided she could take no more. H left a message on her home answering machine threatening to break the locked glass door leading to her bedroom in the house in the Hideout. W then made a motion to terminate his use of the Hideout and for an order of protection to keep him away from her and her home. A temporary order of protection then in effect was replaced with a two-year final order of protection. The final order commenced on July 30, 2007, and it expired on July 30, 2009. H appealed, and the Appellate Division unanimously affirmed the trial court's decision. It held that H, as a result of his 'egregious behavior,' had 'forfeited his right to the unusually generous and extraordinary condition allowing him to share living quarters with his former spouse.' W returned to court, this time on the instant motion seeking to have him once more barred from entering the Hideout.