Ross v. Figueroa

California Court of Appeal

43 Cal. Rptr. 3d 289 (2006)

Relevant factsFree

Tameka Ross (plaintiff) obtained an ex parte temporary restraining order (TRO) against her former live-in partner Oscar Figueroa (defendant); the standard court form told Figueroa only that he could respond in writing before the hearing on making the order permanent. Neither party had an attorney at the hearing; Figueroa asked for a continuance, which the trial court denied, and the court also refused to let him submit evidence. The trial court then granted a three-year permanent restraining order, and Figueroa appealed.

IssueFree

Whether a party must be granted one continuance upon request when responding to a permanent restraining order request following an ex parte temporary restraining order.

Holding & reasoning

The court resolved the question by applying the controlling rule to the facts and explaining precisely why the outcome followed. Its reasoning ties the doctrine to the record so you can reproduce the analysis on an exam.

Procedural history, concurrence & dissent

This section traces the case from the trial court through appeal and lays out how each opinion lands. Separate writings sharpen the majority's limits and flag the arguments most likely to resurface in class.

Unlock the full brief

Free accounts read 20 full briefs. No card required.

Start free Log in