4.6.2 Extending a Protective Order

Under La. R.S. 46:2136(F), a protective order may be extended beyond 18 months if the petitioner applies for an extension prior to the order’s expiration and the court holds a hearing on the extension request.1  Presumably, the entire protective order may be extended for another 18 months, and the portion prohibiting harassment, abuse, and interference with the person or employment may be extended indefinitely.2  In determining whether to extend an order under the Domestic Abuse Assistance Act, the trial court enjoys “vast” discretion.3  Although nothing in the law requires a showing that the defendant violated the prior protective order, past failure to abide by a protective order is a proper basis for extending an order of protection.4  Once a protective order expires without having been extended, a petitioner probably cannot get another protective order in the absence of new allegations or evidence.5

Some judges may be willing to extend a protective order but unwilling to extend some of the ancillary relief granted in the original order, such as temporary child custody and spousal support. For this reason, a petitioner who requests an extension should be prepared to file other actions to resolve those issues (if the protective order claims were not raised in an already existing divorce or custody action).

• 1See also Coie v. Coie, 42,077, p. 7 (La. App. 2 Cir. 2/21/07), 948 So. 2d 1276, 1279 (holding the trial court erred by extending terms of expired protective order); Keneker v. Keneker, 579 So. 2d 1083, 1085 (La. App. 5 Cir. 1991) (extending protective orders under the Domestic Abuse Assistance Act must be made prior to expiration of last order).
• 2See Cave v. Cave, 2020-2040, p. 13 (La. App. 1 Cir. 3/25/21), 2021 WL 1134946, at *26 (stating that the permanent injunctions in the appealed protective order against harassment, contact, and going within 100 yards of protected persons does not expire).
• 3Francois v. Francois, 06-712, p. 5 (La. App. 3 Cir. 11/2/06), 941 So. 2d 722, 726; see Aguillard v. Aguillard, 2019-757, p. 19 (La. App. 3 Cir. 7/8/20), 304 So. 3d 473, 484 (stating that trial courts are given wide discretion in deciding whether to issue protective orders); Pierce v. Pierce, 2019-0689, p. 7 (La. App. 1 Cir. 2/21/20), 298 So. 3d 902, 908 (holding that the trial court did not abuse its “vast discretion” by not issuing a protective order).
• 4Francois, 06-712, p. 5, 941 So. 2d at 726; see Cave, 2020-2040, p. 13, 2021 WL 1134946, at *26 (stating that a court may modify non-permanent protective order provisions pursuant to La. R.S. 46:2136(F), in a case in which the rule to extend the protective order alleged violations of provisions of the protective order).
• 5See Clayton v. Abbitt, 44,427, pp. 1–2 (La. App. 2 Cir. 7/1/09), 16 So. 3d 512, 513–14 (reversing second issuance of protective order where it was not supported by new allegations after expiration of the first order).