This is the only published opinion today (as of 3:00 p.m.) from the Ninth Circuit and California Court of Appeal, and it also seems entirely correct. It does look — overwhelmingly — like Husband hit Wife, likely repeatedly, and that Wife was entitled to a domestic violence restraining order. I’m glad that Wife is now out of that (acutely) horrible situation.
Just one minor error: Given the context, at the top of page 3, in the sentences that say “At a March 15, 2023 hearing, Husband was represented by counsel.
Wife requested a continuance so she could seek counsel of her own.
Husband’s counsel objected, saying Wife was ready to proceed with the merits
of the petition,” I think the last “Wife” was supposed to be “Husband”.
Otherwise, spot on.