Yarmie v. Martin
Filed 4/13/06 Yarmie v. Martin CA2/3
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS
California Rules of Court, rule 977(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 977(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION THREE
| DANA LEE YARMIE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. THEODORE ALLEN MARTIN, Defendant and Appellant. | B176262 (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. EF000721) |
APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Zaven Sinanian, Judge. Reversed.
Alan D. Negron for Defendant and Appellant.
Law offices of Loyst P. Fletcher, Loyst P. Fletcher and Christopher A. Pfau for Plaintiff and Respondent.
INTRODUCTION
Defendant and appellant Theodore Allen Martin (Martin) appeals from a restraining order issued pursuant to the Domestic Violence Protection Act, Family Code section 6200 et seq. (DMVA). We agree with Martin's contention that the record lacks substantial evidence to support the order. We reverse.
FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
1. Preliminary facts.
Dana Lee Yarmie (Yarmie) had a son Nicholas, born in August 1995. On February 14, 2000, pursuant to stipulation, a judgment of paternity was entered establishing that Martin was Nicholas's father. Legal and physical custody was awarded to Yarmie; Martin was ordered to pay child support and was granted visitation.
On August 29, 2003, Yarmie filed a request for order pursuant to the DMVA. Yarmie sought to stop all visitation and contact with her and her son â€
