Only in limited circumstances. A California family court cannot issue mutual domestic violence restraining orders just because each person accuses the other. Both people must personally appear, each must have filed their own request on the official application form, and the judge must make detailed findings that both acted as a primary aggressor and that neither acted primarily in self-defense.

These rules govern the civil restraining order case in family court. If police arrested both of you, the criminal cases and any criminal protective orders are handled separately, under different rules.

The starting point is no mutual order

Family Code section 6305(a) says the court “shall not issue a mutual order” restraining the parties from the kinds of abuse listed in Family Code section 6320 unless two conditions are both met. A mutual order restrains each person from conduct such as contacting, harassing, or coming near the other. Because the statute is written as a prohibition with a narrow exception, accusations on both sides, or each person denying the other’s version of events, are not enough on their own.

Condition one: your own request, and both of you in court

Both parties must personally appear, and each must present written evidence of abuse or domestic violence “in an application for relief using a mandatory Judicial Council restraining order application form” (section 6305(a)(1)). That form is the DV-100 request, the same form used to start any request under this law. The statute adds that written evidence of abuse “in a responsive pleading does not satisfy” this requirement. So a person who only files papers opposing the other side’s request, even papers that describe abuse, has not met this condition.

Condition two: findings that both were primary aggressors

The judge must also make “detailed findings of fact” that both of you acted as a primary aggressor and that neither of you acted primarily in self-defense (section 6305(a)(2)). In deciding that, the court must consider the dominant-aggressor provisions of Penal Code section 836(c)(3) (section 6305(b)). Under those provisions, the dominant aggressor is the most significant aggressor, not necessarily the one who acted first, and the factors include the law’s goal of protecting victims from continuing abuse, any threats that caused fear of physical injury, the past history of domestic violence between you, and whether either of you was defending yourself. A judge who is not convinced that both of you were primary aggressors, or who finds that one of you acted mainly in self-defense, cannot issue mutual orders even if both of you asked for protection.

How courts apply this when both people file

These conditions have been applied where each person filed a separate request and the judge granted both. In K.L. v. R.H. (2021) 70 Cal.App.5th 965, each parent filed a request, and the trial court heard them as “two separate trials” and issued orders against both. The Court of Appeal held that the judge had to weigh the two parents’ acts against each other rather than separately and had failed to consider the section 836(c)(3) factors. It affirmed the order against the parent whose acts it described as significantly more violent and reversed the order against the other parent.

If you want protection too

  • File your own DV-100 request well before the hearing. A response to the other person’s request does not count toward a mutual order.
  • Plan to attend in person. The statute requires both parties to personally appear.
  • Bring evidence that speaks to what the judge must weigh: threats, the history between you, who was the more significant aggressor, and any self-defense.

Talk to a lawyer about your situation

Whether mutual orders are available, or advisable, depends on the specific history between the two of you. The Law Offices of David S. Chesley can review both requests and the evidence before your restraining order hearing. Call (800) 755-5174.