Please E-mail suggested additions, comments and/or corrections to Kent@MoreLaw.Com.
Help support the publication of case reports on MoreLaw
K.F. v. T.D.
Date: 02-28-2025
Case Number: RSA 633:3-a
Judge: Zain
Court: Circuit Court, Merrimack County, New Hamsphire
Plaintiff's Attorney:
Click Here For The Best Concord Personal Injury Lawyer Directory
Click Here For The Best Concord Personal Injury Lawyer Directory
Defendant's Attorney: Not Available
Description:
Concord, New Hampshire personal injury lawyer represented the Plaintiff who filed a stalking petition.
The trial court held a hearing on the petition on June 24. The plaintiff testified that the reason she sought a protective order was because the defendant stated on Facebook that "he was going to treat [her] husband like it was Gaza war and that there was going to be no cease fire. And he was going to get all men boots on the ground, available and ready to come after [her] husband. And there was going to be casualties on one end." The plaintiff testified that she was "in fear of [her] life because of that post."
* * *
We agree with the defendant that the statements in the post were insufficient, as a matter of law, to constitute conduct "[t]hreatening the safety" of the plaintiff. RSA 633:3-a, II(a)(1). When determining whether conduct caused the plaintiff to fear for her safety, an objective, reasonable person standard applies. See RSA 633:3-a, I(a) (requiring "a reasonable person to fear for . . . her personal safety"); Comer v. Tracey, 156 N.H. 241, 249 (2007) (finding evidence of course of conduct insufficient to support conclusion reasonable person would have been placed in fear for personal safety). Even assuming the statements were targeted at the plaintiff, a reasonable person would not have interpreted the language in the post as a serious expression of a threat to her personal safety to support a finding of stalking.
* * *
CIVIL LAW. STALKING AND PROTECTIVE ORDERS. The court addresses whether Facebook posts containing hyperbolic language comparing a personal dispute to geopolitical conflict constituted a credible threat under stalking law sufficient to uphold a protective order.
CIVIL PROCEDURE. SUFFICIENCY OF EVIDENCE. The case involves an appeal concerning whether the evidence presented was sufficient to support the issuance of a stalking final order of protection based on hyperbolic online statements and whether a reasonable person standard was appropriately applied.
Key Phrases Civil stalking final order of protection. Reasonable person standard. Course of conduct. Fear for personal safety. Objective, reasonable person.
The trial court held a hearing on the petition on June 24. The plaintiff testified that the reason she sought a protective order was because the defendant stated on Facebook that "he was going to treat [her] husband like it was Gaza war and that there was going to be no cease fire. And he was going to get all men boots on the ground, available and ready to come after [her] husband. And there was going to be casualties on one end." The plaintiff testified that she was "in fear of [her] life because of that post."
* * *
We agree with the defendant that the statements in the post were insufficient, as a matter of law, to constitute conduct "[t]hreatening the safety" of the plaintiff. RSA 633:3-a, II(a)(1). When determining whether conduct caused the plaintiff to fear for her safety, an objective, reasonable person standard applies. See RSA 633:3-a, I(a) (requiring "a reasonable person to fear for . . . her personal safety"); Comer v. Tracey, 156 N.H. 241, 249 (2007) (finding evidence of course of conduct insufficient to support conclusion reasonable person would have been placed in fear for personal safety). Even assuming the statements were targeted at the plaintiff, a reasonable person would not have interpreted the language in the post as a serious expression of a threat to her personal safety to support a finding of stalking.
* * *
CIVIL LAW. STALKING AND PROTECTIVE ORDERS. The court addresses whether Facebook posts containing hyperbolic language comparing a personal dispute to geopolitical conflict constituted a credible threat under stalking law sufficient to uphold a protective order.
CIVIL PROCEDURE. SUFFICIENCY OF EVIDENCE. The case involves an appeal concerning whether the evidence presented was sufficient to support the issuance of a stalking final order of protection based on hyperbolic online statements and whether a reasonable person standard was appropriately applied.
Key Phrases Civil stalking final order of protection. Reasonable person standard. Course of conduct. Fear for personal safety. Objective, reasonable person.
Outcome:
Reversed
Plaintiff's Experts:
Defendant's Experts:
Comments:
About This Case
What was the outcome of K.F. v. T.D.?
The outcome was: Reversed
Which court heard K.F. v. T.D.?
This case was heard in Circuit Court, Merrimack County, New Hamsphire, NH. The presiding judge was Zain.
Who were the attorneys in K.F. v. T.D.?
Plaintiff's attorney: Click Here For The Best Concord Personal Injury Lawyer Directory. Defendant's attorney: Not Available.
When was K.F. v. T.D. decided?
This case was decided on February 28, 2025.