1. Injunction under Post-Separation Family Violence Relief Act, La. R.S. 9:366(A)       

In PSFVRA cases involving family violence, the court must include an injunction against abuse in the judgment for divorce.1  The terms of the injunction include restrictive no contact and stay away provisions in addition to typical prohibitions against physical abuse and harassment.2  The statute does not put a time limit on these injunctions, and they are typically issued as permanent injunctions. These injunctions, like all injunctions prohibiting abuse, should be reduced to an LPOR form, are entered into the Louisiana Protective Order Registry, and are a crime to violate.3

2. Injunction against Abuse Ancillary to Divorce, La. R.S. 9:372

These injunctions are also available to victims of abuse who are married to their perpetrators and are seeking divorce. The injunctions available under this provision are more generic and less specific than those available through other statutes and prohibit “a spouse from physically or sexually abusing the other spouse or a child of either of the parties.” But like all injunctions prohibiting abuse, these injunctions are entered into the Louisiana Protective Order Registry and are a crime to violate.4

These orders can be permanent but must be issued prior to or in the divorce. Also, if an injunction is not included in the divorce, prior injunctions issued under this statute may expire upon divorce.5  If granted at divorce, the injunction should be included in the divorce judgment and must also be reduced to a Uniform Abuse Prevention Order form for submission to the LPOR. A subsequent divorce judgment may supersede a protective order if it fails to restate the injunctions against abuse.6

3. Injunctions against Harassment, La. R.S. 9:372.1

These injunctions are frequently issued as mutual injunctions in divorce cases but should rarely, if ever, be used in domestic violence cases. In domestic violence cases, both judges and opposing counsel often propose these injunctions to promote settlement. But injunctions against harassment are a poor substitute for injunctions against abuse for several reasons. First, any mutual injunction should be considered potentially dangerous to victims for reasons described elsewhere in this chapter.7  But even if these orders are not mutual, they provide little protection to victims. Injunctions against harassment, unlike injunctions prohibiting abuse, are not reduced to a Louisiana Protective Order Registry Form and are not entered into the protective order registry. They are enforceable through contempt proceedings rather than arrest under the Criminal Code’s protective order violation statute, making enforcement both more difficult and less likely to address immediate safety issues.8

Importantly, these orders do not exempt an abused party from the custodial relocation notice requirements that protect victims with children who relocate,9  and they do not invoke federal firearm prohibitions.10

• 1La. R.S. 9:366(A).
• 2La. R.S. 9:363.
• 3La. R.S. 14:79.
• 4Lawrence v. Lawrence, 02-1066, p. 3 (La. App. 3 Cir. 3/5/03), 839 So. 2d 1201, 1203 (holding that an injunction may not be issued three years after divorce); Steele v. Steele, 591 So. 2d 810, 812 (La. App. 3 Cir. 1991).
• 5Steele, 591 So. 2d at 812.
• 6See id. (holding that a pre-divorce injunction under predecessor statute expires upon divorce if not expressly continued in divorce judgment).
• 7For further discussion of the potential dangers of mutual injunctions, see Section 3.5.
• 8La. R.S. 14:79.
• 9La. R.S. 9:355.2(C)(2).
• 1018 U.S.C. § 922 (g).

When assessing which injunction best meets your client’s needs consider the following:

Differences in Relief. In general, the three injunctions mentioned in the previous section are similarly enforceable, but provide different relief. The PSFVRA explicitly defines injunctions to include restrictive stay-away and no-contact provisions that are not available through injunctions with divorce that merely prohibit abuse.1  Another key difference is the effect of violations on custody determinations. If a petitioner is awarded an injunction under La. R.S. 9:366 (the PSFVRA), any violation of that injunction requires that the abusive parent’s visitation be terminated.2  This law can function both as a strong deterrent for the abusive party and as an important tool to protect victims and their children. It is not available under La. R.S. 9:372 injunctions ancillary to divorce.

On the other hand, La. R.S. 9:372 injunctions against abuse ancillary to divorce include generic prohibitions against conduct that is already illegal (i.e., physical and sexual abuse). La. R.S. 9:372 includes no explicit language regarding stay away provisions, prohibitions on contact, or restrictions on conduct that is not already illegal.3  Even though an Injunction Ancillary to Divorce appears to prohibit only behavior that is already criminal, many courts will include additional remedies, like stay away provisions, if they are specifically pled. In fact, the Louisiana Protective Order Registry Form for section 372 injunctions includes remedies not specifically enumerated in the statute, and those forms create persuasive authority in favor of expanded relief.4

Enforceability. Even a very limited Injunction Against Abuse Ancillary to Divorce creates an important remedy for victims because it creates additional criminal enforcement mechanisms. These orders, like all injunctions prohibiting abuse, are entered into the Louisiana Protective Order Registry and are a crime to violate.5  So an abuser who violates either type of injunction could potentially be charged both with violation of the order and with any underlying crime committed during the violation.

Making a Decision. Given these differences, lawyers should consider how the protections available under each statute fit a client’s specific circumstances, whether the visitation termination provision of the PSFVRA is likely to be invoked against an abuser who violates an injunction, and whether the evidence satisfies the requisite burdens. A petitioner who desires the flexibility of more substantial contact because of shared children may find a no-contact provision impractical and instead opt for a less restrictive order in an Injunction Ancillary to Divorce under section 372. On the other hand, a petitioner who has been stalked and harassed or who feels the risk of future harm is imminent or likely may want a more restrictive order under the PSFVRA to prevent her abuser from using shared children as an excuse to facilitate unwanted or dangerous contact. These issues should be discussed in detail with clients so that lawyers can request and draft orders that are tailored to meet each client’s specific needs and also so that ultimate decisions affecting client safety are the client’s, not the lawyer’s.6  If the client elects not to seek a permanent injunction under the PSFVRA, you should document this decision in writing to the client, after a full discussion of the advantages and disadvantages of the injunction.

• 1La. R.S. 9:361.
• 2La. R.S. 9:366(B).
• 3However, Louisiana’s Protective Order Forms include no contact provisions for injunctions issued under La. R.S. 9:372. See Legal Forms, La. Sup. Ct.
• 4McCann v. McCann, 09-1341, p. 10 (La. App. 3 Cir. 3/10/10), 33 So. 3d 389, 396.
• 5La. R.S. 14:79.
• 6While lawyers should defer to client decisions on issues regarding safety, some clients minimize the risk of future harm and, initially, can be unrealistic about the possibility of safe contact with abusers. See Jacquelyn C. Campbell, et al., The Danger Assessment: Validation of a Lethality Risk Assessment Instrument for Intimate Partner Femicide, 24 J. Interpersonal Violence 653 (2008). In this situation, the lawyer might ask the client to consider whether her expectations of an abuser’s future conduct are supported by the abuser’s past conduct. An unrealistic order that anticipates cooperation by an abuser can be unsafe for victims and can also increase the likelihood of future litigation, which can be quite expensive.

Injunctions at divorce under either La. R.S. 9:366 or 9:372 are generally considered permanent and often last longer than orders awarded under the protective order statutes.  Although courts may issue protective orders under the DAAA with provisions that can last indefinitely, many judges rarely do so, preferring to issue orders that expire after a fixed period of time. A client who fails to request a permanent injunction at divorce may miss her opportunity for a permanent order.1

In addition, once a DAAA order expires, the child custody relocation statute may apply to victims who do not obtain more permanent orders. Victims of domestic violence are exempt from the notice requirements of relocation only if a protective order is “in effect” when they relocate.2

• 1For further discussion of this point, see Section 6.1.1.
• 2La. R.S. 9:355.2(C)(2).

In some circumstances, a client may be able to obtain a divorce by default judgment without a hearing.1  However, courts and judges vary in their willingness to grant a divorce by default if the petitioner has also requested an injunction. Where a petitioner has requested a permanent injunction at divorce, lawyers should plan to introduce testimony and evidence about the violence to support an award of a permanent injunction.

• 1For further discussion of default-judgment divorces, see Section 3.7 of the chapter on family law.