The answer to your query depends largely on the reasons for the denials of your previous requests. I have observed a great many cases in which Pro Per litigants simply failed to factually support their requests. In other words, they would identify, in general terms, that an incident occurred, but failed to cite the date, time, location, specific acts of violence (e.g., "she then hit me on the right side of the face, near my eye, with the cell phone she had in her right hand.") and injuries. If the Court determined that your previous allegations were simply untrue or not credible, that could hurt you moving forward. But if it was simply that you failed to be specific enough to carry your burden of proof, it would likely have little, if any effect.
Whenever the stakes are this high (your potential safety) you should always consult with a lawyer. The lawyer will make sure that the specific facts necessary (if they exists) will be made known to the Judge so that you have the best chance of getting the orders you need.
Many attorneys like myself, do limited scope agreements, where they only prepare the papers for court and try to prepare you to testify it is far less expensive; I always recommend consulting and using an attorney when you can afford one as that usually increases your chances of winning. But if you can’t afford one, consult with one. It is often worth the 2 or 3 hours to know what to say and how to say it. I am available by phone for appointments
I handle family law matters: child custody, property dispute in Los Angeles or Orange County, California. Always consult attorneys in your state!! Use Avvo’s tab “find a Lawyer” above.
In child custody, the simplest explanation is “what is in the best interests of the child (ren). In support: proof of earnings, needs of the children and percentage of time spent with the child(ren).
My name is Stephen R. Cohen and have practiced since 1974. I practice in Los Angeles and Orange County, CA. These answers do not create an attorney client relationship. My answers may offend I believe in telling the truth, I use common sense as well as the law. Other state's laws may differ.. There are a lot of really good attorneys on this site, I will do limited appearances which are preparation of court documents it is , less expensive. However generally I believe an attorney is better than none.
It really depends on the facts that make up the grounds for the more recent TRO. The facts should stand on their own. However, if the last restraining order was a close call, I think you can demonstrate to the judge that this is a pattern and (without directly saying it) that it was a mistake to deny the restraining order last time, and the proof is that it happened again. Remember the restraining order hearing is a mini-trial. Make sure you bring any witnesses to court with you and be prepared to examine them (ask them questions about what they observed). In order to prove that the permanent restraining should issue, it has to be more than a he said/she said situation. You must have facts to prove your case -- pictures of injury can be very strong evidence. Also, don't forget emails and texts with threats or admissions.
Sign up to receive a 3-part series of useful information and advice about child custody law.