Case Results » Restraining Orders

  • Lynn District Court: Restraining Order 209A Does Not Issue and Bail Revocation Request Denied

    The defendant is facing sexual assault and vandalism charges in the Lynn District Court. Today was a scheduled status conference at which the defendant expected to obtain discovery and possibly schedule a trial date. When he got to court he and his attorney were surprised to see the victim of the vandalism case appear and request a 209A restraining order. The victim claimed that our client had broken a bottle over his head in the past and was exhibiting increasingly hostile behavior towards him. Hearing this, the prosecutor on the underlying criminal case moved to revoke bail. Attorney Neyman succeeded in getting the restraining order not to issue and the bail to remain in tact.

    Read More in Bail Hearings

  • Framingham District Court: Pretrial Probation Reimposed After Violation on Restraining Order Case

    The defendant is a professor at a prestigious local university. He was charged with violating a restraining order, G.L. c. 209A over two years ago. After some contentious litigation Attorney Neyman was able to get the man pretrial probation pursuant to G.L. c. 276 Section 87. He quickly violated the conditions set by the judge and was placed back on the trial list. The district attorney's office wanted a guilty finding and the litigation was rekindled. Today, our office succeeded in getting pretrial probation again with the original conditions. The case will be dismissed in the fall.

    Read More in Pretrial Probation

  • Palmer District Court: G.L. 209A Restraining Order Vacated After Hearing

    The defendant is a twenty year old man against whom a restraining order issued late last week. A return date was scheduled for today. Our office was hired over the weekend. The affidavit in support of the restraining order application claimed that the defendant was abusive to the complainant and that he was indirectly involving her in his alleged criminal activities including drug dealing. Reading between the lines it was clear that the complainant's mother was behind the efforts to keep the parties apart and most likely the motivation behind the restraining order efforts. Our office appeared today for the extension hearing. After making our case and clarifying the inadequacies of the supporting affidavit and in court testimony the judge agreed and vacated the restraining order.

    Read More in Drug Crimes

  • Quincy District Court: Not Guilty Verdict for Weymouth Man Charged With Violation of a Harassment Prevention Order

    In November of 2015 the defendant was served with a harassment prevention order pursuant to G.L. c. 258E. He appeared without a lawyer to contest the order. His efforts were unsuccessful. Subsequently, the accused was in a parking lot at a large shopping center in Weymouth. There, it is alleged that he observed the woman who had obtained the harassment prevention order and performed acts designed to intimidate her. She immediately contacted the local police who arrived at the scene, took witness statements and eventually arrested the accused. The man was charged with violating a 258E harassment prevention order, a crime under G.L. c. 258E Section 9. Attorney Neyman was hired to represent the man. Today, the case went to trial. The defendant was found not guilty.

    Read More in Criminal Harassment

  • Framingham District Court: Request for Permanent Restraining Order Denied

    The defendant and his wife have been estranged following allegations of abuse against the husband. A 209A abuse and prevention order issued against our client prior to our office being involved in the case. The wife has attempted on multiple occasions to have the order extended permanently. It is the defendant's belief that such efforts are being exerted to manipulate child custody and visitation schedules in collateral proceedings. To this end the wife has made unsupported claims that she has been assaulted by our client in the past. Today, Attorney Neyman successfully defended another attempt by the wife to extend the restraining order permanently.

    Read More in Domestic Assault and Battery

  • Peabody District Court: Restraining Order Modified and to be Vacated

    The defendant and complainant are husband and wife. Following a domestic dispute that became violent and resulted in criminal charges the complainant applied for and obtained a restraining order against the defendant. He in turn immediately hired Attorney Stephen Neyman to appear in court and move to modify and vacate the order. In just a few days we were able to schedule a hearing at which time the 209A restraining order was modified and agreed to be vacated in two weeks.

    Read More in Peabody Criminal Defense Attorney

  • Framingham District Court: Pretrial Probation for Professor Charged With Violating 209A Restraining Order

    The defendant is a professor who lives and works out of state. He is tenured at a major university. The prosecution alleged that in February of 2015 the man contacted his soon to be ex-wife and children through a third party notwithstanding the existence of a valid 209A restraining order. Based on the history of the relationship between the parties the prosecution wanted a guilty finding. Anything short of pretrial probation pursuant to G.L. c. 276 Section 87 would likely result in the defendant losing his job and becoming unemployable in his field. After over a year of fighting for out client today Attorney Neyman was able to get pretrial probation. The man will have no criminal record.

    Read More in Pretrial Probation

  • Lowell District Court: Restraining Order Against Construction Worker Vacated

    Our client is a construction worker who was served with a 209A restraining order in October of last year. The order was to last for one year and prevented the man from contacting his former girlfriend. This order presented the man with severe hardships. The threat of a violation and the issuance of a criminal complaint constantly loomed. He hired Attorney Stephen Neyman to vacate the order. Today, after a hearing we were able to get the restraining order lifted.

  • Brighton District Court: Restraining Order Against Psychologist Vacated

    The defendant is a professional living in Boston. About two weeks ago her former boyfriend successfully applied for a G.L. c. 209A restraining order. A hearing was set for today. The woman hired our office to fight against any extension and to vacate the existing order. The plaintiff complained that he was struck from behind by our client with a hard object that rendered him unconscious. He presented corroborating medical evidence from a local hospital. Our office accumulated substantial evidence demonstrating that the restraining order was being used to manipulate our client and that is should be vacated. After a hearing the judge agreed not to extend the order and to vacate the existing order.

    Read More in Domestic Assault and Battery

  • Woburn District Court: Violation of Restraining Order Continued Without a Finding

    On October 31, 2015 a local police department responded to a call from an elderly services worker. The worker was meeting with a woman who had allegedly been assaulted by her husband. The victim had taken a restraining order out against the man. During the meeting the defendant arrived at the victim's home in violation of the order. He began banging on the door, eventually gaining access. The police arrived and arrested him, charging him with a 209A violation. Today, our office was able to get the case continued without a finding.

    Read More in Assault and Battery

  • Fall River District Court: Restraining Order Against South Shore Businessman Vacated

    The defendant is a successful businessman working in the South Shore area. On April 30, 2015 his former girlfriend applied for an emergency restraining order in the Fall River District Court. She alleged that for a four month period the defendant threatened her, abused her and harassed her family. The woman further alleged that the defendant stalked her and her family for an extensive period of time and that he was mentally unstable. Today, Attorney Neyman appeared with the man and was able to vacate the restraining order.

    Read More in Restraining Orders

  • Salem District Court: Harassment Prevention Order Application Denied

    The plaintiff and defendant are neighbors. They have been engaged in various disputes for several years. Recently, the plaintiff made a complaint for a harassment prevention order in the Salem District Court. He alleged that the defendant started several fights with contractors working on his home. He complained that she trespassed on his property several times. He also alleged that she harassed his tenants. The plaintiff also stated that the defendant caused damage to his property and that on a daily basis she assaulted him with obscene gestures. The defendant hired Attorney Stephen Neyman to represent her at the harassment prevention order hearing. Today, after hearing our arguments the declined to issue the order.

  • Hingham District Court: Temporary Restraining Order Vacated After Hearing

    The defendant is an attorney who was involved in a dating relationship with a woman from Hingham. The woman terminated the relationship. The man was unable to accept the breakup and continuously called her. The call frequency escalated. The woman refused to respond. The defendant then started to follow her to various locations she frequented. One of those places is a fitness gym where her children observed the accused following her. She then sought and obtained a temporary restraining order. The defendant subsequently went to her home, entering it when she was upstairs taking a shower. At hearing for extending the order our office succeeded in convincing the judge to vacate the existing order and no extend it.

  • Brighton District Court: Attorney Neyman Wins Restraining Order Hearing

    The plaintiff and defendant are cousins one of whom lives in Brighton, Massachusetts. On August 18, 2014 the plaintiff applied for an ex parte restraining order. His request was granted and a hearing was scheduled for today to decide whether or not to extend the order. The defendant, who lives out of state hired Attorney Stephen Neyman to represent him. The plaintiff asked for an extension of the order. He claimed that the defendant had threatened him physically and that he believed that threats were real. In support of this belief was a recorded telephone call that the defendant made to the Boston Police. Attorney Neyman convinced the judge to vacate the order and to refuse to extend the order. The defendant never had to appear in court.

  • Taunton District Court: Harassment Prevention Order Against Army Sergeant Does Not Issue

    The complainant and the defendant had an intense dating relationship for a short period of time. According to the complainant the relationship ended and the defendant, a sergeant in the Army  continued to pursue him. The complainant alleged in an affidavit that on July 9, 2014 our client sent him threatening texts. She then broke into his home in Taunton, Massachusetts where his pregnant girlfriend and her children were sleeping. While in the home she threatened him and the girlfriend. She finally left the home and slashed three of the four tires on his car. Attorney Neyman represented the woman today on a harassment prevention order and restraining order hearing. After a hearing our office convinced the judge not to issue the order.

  • Woburn District Court: Restraining Order Against Local Businessman Dismissed

    The complainant and the defendant had a dating relationship for several years. In recent months the relationship ended when the complainant, a woman began seeing another man.The defendant was unable to accept this and badgered the woman for several months. He went to her place of business unannounced and over her protestations. He used social medial to harass the woman and intimidate her new boyfriend. He drove by her parents home in hopes of making "inadvertent" contact with her. He stalked her and reminded her of former incidents of abuse and insinuated that such abuse might resume. The woman applied for an emergency restraining order that was granted. Today, Attorney Neyman was able to get the order dismissed.

  • Restraining Order Issued Against Fitness Trainer Vacated

    Plymouth District Court: The defendant is a female fitness trainer who had been dating a married police officer for several months. The relationship became serious and the officer's family members learned what had been happening. The officer sought to terminate the relationship in order to save his marriage and possibly his job. To do this he took out Restraining Order against the woman. Our office was hired to go into court and try to vacate the Restraining Order. Today, Attorney Neyman was able to have the order vacated thereby lifting all restrictions that had been imposed on our client.

  • Charges of Violation of a Restraining Order to be Dismissed

    Brookline District Court: On November 9, 2012 a Brookline, Massachusetts Police Officer was dispatched to take a report for a Violation of a Restraining Order. The officer met with the victim who stated that she had a restraining order against her former boyfriend. The order was in fact in existence. The victim complained that the defendant had been contacting her for several weeks all in violation of the order. A criminal complaint issued. The defendant was arrested on a warrant and hired our office. Today, we succeeded in getting the case resolved by a continuance without a finding. Absent any criminal legal problems this case will be dismissed.

  • 209A restraining order vacated after hearing

    Roxbury District Court: It was alleged that our client bought a one-way ticket from Texas to Boston, went to a former boyfriend's apartment upon arrival, and was escorted out of his building by security. The ex-boyfriend alleged that our client called him 20 times per day and " stalked" him at a local bar, grocery store, and his workplace. He also claimed that she followed him along Boston streets, ducking into doorways as she walked. An existing order was vacated after Denise Dolan of our office represented our client at a hearing.

  • 209A restraining order modified after hearing

    Hingham District Court: Prior to retaining our office, our client's brother- in- law had obtained a temporary restraining order which contained a provision ordering our client to stay away from her parents' home. The plaintiff brother-in-law claimed that the stay away provision was needed because he and his wife regularly cared for our client's parents. Our client retained our office to challenge that provision because she was living in her parents' home and had been doing so for approximately one year, as she had lost her job. Denise Dolan of our office successfully argued that the brother-in-law had no legal standing to request a stay away from the parents' home, and the court vacated the challenged part of the 209A order.

  • Felony Charge of Malicious Destruction of Motor Vehicle Dismissed, Possession of Counterfeit Money to be Dismissed

    Natick District Court: The prosecution alleged that on June 24, 2011 Natick police officers responded to a mall security report of a male slashing tires on a car in the parking lot. The defendant's vehicle was leaving the parking lot and stopped by the police. Security cameras caught the act on tape. The defendant was stopped, identified and arrested. In his possession the police found the knife used to commit the felony act. The defendant confessed to the act, which is a felony that by law cannot be continued without a finding. While searching his car the police located seven hundred dollars counterfeit cash, also a felony in Massachusetts. Today Attorney Neyman was able to get the charge of Malicious Destruction to a Motor Vehicle dismissed. The remaining charges were continued without a finding with unsupervised probation. If the defendant remains free from criminal legal trouble for the next year all charges will be formally dismissed.

  • 209A restraining order vacated

    Brighton District Court: The mother of the defendant's child sought the extension of an abuse prevention order, claiming that the relationship deteriorated as a result of our client's drinking habits. She claimed that while drinking, he would become offensive and put her in fear for her physical safety. She claimed that she fled from the couple's California home with their infant son because of this and that since that time, he had contacted her with threatening messages. Today, Denise Dolan of our office was able to get the order vacated.

  • 258E harassment prevention order not granted

    Roxbury District Court: The plaintiff filed a complaint for protection from harassment against our client, a fitness professional at a local gym. The plaintiff alleged that our client harassed her at the gym while she was pregnant. According to the plaintiff, the unborn child belonged to our client's husband, and the purported affair resulted in the alleged verbal abuse. After our office was retained to represent the defendant, the harassment prevention order was not granted.

  • Motion to Vacate Convictions of Malicious Destruction of Property over $250, Restraining Order Violation, and Operating After Suspension or Revocation of License Allowed

    Lowell District Court: Our client became subject to removal from the United States once it came to the attention of authorities that he was an alien who had admitted to acts that constituted elements of a crime involving moral turpitude. He hired our office to move to vacate the convictions, and our motion was allowed on the grounds that his attorney did not advise him of immigration consequences of admitting to sufficient facts and that he did not receive an adequate plea colloquy. The matters now stand for new trial, giving our client the opportunity to avoid adverse immigration consequences.

  • Complaints of Restraining Order (209A) Violations , Criminal Harassment and Annoying Telephone Calls not issued after clerk's hearing

    South Boston District Court: Police applied for three complaints against our client. In one, it was alleged that he was parked outside of his ex-girlfriend's apartment in violation of an existing restraining order. In another, it was alleged that our client violated the restraining order on a different occasion by making several phone calls and sending e-mail and Facebook messages. Additionally, it was alleged that on yet another occasion, our client called this woman 30 times in a 24 hour period and followed a pizza delivery man into her apartment building to bang on her door. Denise Dolan of our office represented our client at a clerk's hearing. Two of these applications were dismissed and one was continued to be dismissed in 7 months.

  • 209A Abuse Prevention Order Vacated

    Boston Municipal Court, East Boston Division: A restraining order had previously issued against our client, a New Hampshire man. The plaintiff had alleged that she overheard our client screaming to two of their mutual colleagues that he wanted to hunt her down and shoot her with an AK-47. After the defendant retained Attorney Neyman's office to represent him at a further extension hearing, our office succeeded in getting the order vacated.

  • Restraining Order against Lawrence man vacated

    Lawrence District Court. The defendant is a Dominican man against whom a former girlfriend obtained a restraining order. The woman claimed that our client knocked on her door and when she did not answer he went around to her bedroom window. When she still did not answer he smashed in the bedroom window and broke down her door. The woman claimed that she feared for her safety and the safety of her daughter. Our office succeeded in getting the restraining order vacated today.

  • Restraining Order vacated on behalf of Massachusetts college student accused of physically abusing his girlfriend

    Roxbury District Court Docket Number: 09-0484. Our client, a local college student working on his doctorate was served with a restraining order for allegedly abusing his girlfriend. On August 10, 2009 she got a restraining order against him. The complaining witness wrote in her affidavit that after breaking up the defendant went into her bedroom, woke her up, turned on the lights and started yelling at her. As the argument continued the defendant grabbed her by the shoulders, shook her and screamed obscenities in her face. He then grabbed her by the wrists and started breaking glasses and dishes. Today we succeeded in getting the restraining order vacated.

  • Appeal of restraining order against college student granted

    Appeals Court Docket Number 2007-P-1530.  In January of 2007 a judge in the Dedham District Court imposed a restraining order on a college student.  The complainant stated that she had a tumultuous relationship with the defendant for two and a half years.  At times he would verbally abuse her, call her names and intimidate her in a manner she claimed lowered her self esteem.  Defense counsel thoroughly cross-examined the woman during the restraining order hearing.  His efforts disclosed that it was the complainant rather that the defendant who had engaged in harassing behavior.  This notwithstanding, the judge imposed the restraining order.  After the order had expired the defendant engaged our office to appeal the order.  Attorney Neyman successfully argued the case to the Massachusetts Appeals Court and the order was reversed.

  • Charges of threatening to commit murder to be dismissed against Methuen juvenile.

    Lawrence District Court # MH 08W0305.  The prosecution alleged that on May 16, 2007 Methuen Police were dispatched to a location for a report of continuing threats.  The victim alleged that the defendant, a juvenile, dropped a cardboard piece of paper at the end of her walkway.  Written on the cardboard were the words "I'm coming soon.  You're gonna die".  The victim claimed that this is the second note she received from the defendant and that she had been stalked by him for several months.  After investigating the matter the police summonsed the defendant for a clerk's hearing.  Attorney Neyman appeared and convinced the clerk magistrate to refrain from issuing a criminal complaint.  If the defendant remains free from all criminal involvement for six (6) months the matter will be dismissed.

Client Reviews
We went to trial and won. He saved me fifteen years mandatory in state prison for this case
★★★★★
I hired him and he got the case dismissed before I had to go into a courtroom. My school never found out and if they had I would have lost my academic scholarships. He really saved my college career.
★★★★★
Melissa C. Cold Spring, New York, October 2013
My union rep told me to call Steve Neyman. From the get go I felt comfortable with him. He took the time to talk to me about my case whenever I needed .... He even gave me his personal cell number and took all my calls. We won the case and I kept my job.
★★★★★
Bart L. S.
The best criminal defense lawyer in Massachusetts. Takes all of his client's calls at any time of the day or night. He was always there for me and my family. Steve saved my life.
★★★★★
Jacquille D. Brockton, Massachusetts
In less than two months Stephen Neyman got my old conviction vacated. I now have no criminal record
★★★★★
Paul W. Boston, Massachusetts