Coming of age in the 90’s meant living through the music industry’s emergence from the nascient, arena rock/power ballad era; where rock immortals like ‘Poison’ and ‘Aerosmith’ (to name a few) etched a genre which vacillated between insipid, cacophonous tropes driven by power chords, and soul-stirring, heartstring-pulling homages to young love, known as the “power ballad”.
The ‘power ballad’ was a main staple of many a late 20th century high school dances. And, there are few who lived through that era, whose ears evaded the Cherone/Bettencourt (performing as ‘Extreme’) contribution: “More Than Words”.
I want to believe that Minnesota courts, when deliberating fact and law in the daily pursuit of justice, can be influenced in no small part by the arts. So I can’t overlook the correlation between legal conclusions and songwriting thematics. I was reviewing a Minnesota Appellate Court’s review of a lower court’s denial of a Domestic Abuse Order for Protection application and the familiar chords of ‘More than Words’ came to mind.
A victim of domestic violence was terrorized by the words and actions of her abuser, and requested protection from her abuser, seeking an Order for Protection; a remedy available to those who can prove by a preponderance of the evidence, that either of the following has been committed by a family member:
- physical harm, bodily injury, or assault; or
- infliction of fear of imminent physical harm, bodily injury or assault
Minn. Stat. § 518B.01, subd. 2(a)
The victim in this case provided no evidence of violent acts on the part of her abuser, but, did testify credibly to the following:
- he said, “I hope you f—ing die”
- drove up in the driveway
- rang the doorbell over and over again
- pounded on the glass door
- blocked the driveway
The victim testified that these actions made her afraid and she felt threatened. In denying her request the trial court found these acts did not rise to the level of domestic abuse. You might say the trial court was looking for something …. “more than words”.
But the Court of Appeals disagreed, and looked at the definition of domestic abuse:“the infliction of fear of imminent physical harm, bodily injury, or assault” and its precedent in recognizing that an overt, physical act is not necessary to support issuance of an order for protection. Pechovnik v. Pechovnik, 765 N.W.2d 94 (Minn. App. 2009). In Pechovnik, the appellate court upheld an order for protection based on the abuser’s words and gestures and the effect they had on the victim.
When applying Minnesota Domestic Abuse law, the Court of Appeals has chosen to bypass the idea of ‘more than words’, and properly leaves, in the past, that yearning so eloquently captured by the power ballads of the 80s and 90s.
Protection from domestic violence is properly granted to those put in fear for their safety. Legal representation in the pursuit of such protection is highly recommended.
Meet Tim Simonson
Tim has been practicing for more than twenty (20) years now, He's handled divorce, child support, child custody, third party and grandparent rights, domestic abuse, parenting time, and many other areas of family law. He always enjoys the chance to meet people and see whether he can help find solutions to their legal problems.
Contact Beyer & Simonson
If you are facing divorce and any of the divorce-related issues such as spousal maintenance, child support, child custody, property division, or domestic abuse matters, you need our experienced Minneapolis divorce attorneys to help you. Contact Beyer & Simonson in Edina, Minnesota today at (952) 303-6007.
