http://www.volokh.com/files/lettermanapp.pdf
http://www.volokh.com/files/lettermantro.pdf
(It was later overturned on the grounds that the Santa Fe court didn't have jurisdiction over mind control transmitted from NY.)
http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/alissa-blanton-stalker-kills-flori...
EDIT: She was actually looking for an order of protection, my mistake
http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Temporary+Rest...
http://www.walnut-creek.org/citygov/depts/police/faqs/violen...
1. Alleged victim goes to judge, gets temporary restraining order on essentially no evidence. This is supposed to be a stop-gap while further process is going on.
2. Alleged perpetrator is notified and a court date set to discuss whether the restraining order is appropriate.
Temporary restraining orders really require nothing more than an allegation to get. The idea is that if the situation is life-threatening, you don't want to wait for evidence, but they are also supposed to be temporary. Longer-term restraining orders are supposed to require evidence and an actual adversarial process.
The article does not say what sort of restraining order was at issue.
If the harasser could get carried away in an argument and start beating, but didn't leave the house planning to kill, then restraining orders can limit the time the harasser is around you and limit the time before they 'blow their cool'. When the harasser breaks the restraining order and comes near you "just to talk, I promise", you can get the police involved straight away, and the harasser can be hauled off before they lose their cool, and things escalate.
A full restraining order is different.
This person knows where you live, where you work, who all your friends are, your family.
Yeah, right. You are expected to quit your job, take your kids out of school (who are possibly also his kids), move hundreds of miles away, and possibly still not get away because they are following you around. On a whim. Oh, and never contact your friends and family again, they can be watching.
Not an option for some people. You need savings and cash while hiding. What if you have children, can you just pull them out of school (say), while you hide? How long would you hide for? 5 years?
If not "normal," that's certainly _common_. There is no proof or evidence required to issue one. The judge only reads a description of events. It is not required for the restrained party to be there to defend or present counter-evidence.
It's simply a 5-10 minute meeting between a judge and a person who alleges "fear" or "emotional harm." Exact laws vary from state to state.
They are free to file and cost 5-10 thousand dollars to appeal.
[1] http://www.dailyfinance.com/2010/03/30/the-high-price-of-res...
Edit: My initial comment understated the issue. Media Radar states that women are twice as likely to engage in unidirectional (unreciprocated) violence towards their partners are men. While domestic violence against men is real and subject to a lot of shame and silence, this estimate seems insane: I have previously seen figures like 10% of domestic violence stemming from women.
The idea behind a lax standard for TRO's is that if there is danger, the court should temporarily try to mitigate it, pending further process.
To an outside observer it probably looked pretty mundane, but inside the little circle of conflict there were real dangers and the judge went with caution.