A person accused of electronic harassment could face misdemeanor charges in California. (Shutterstock)

A person accused of electronic harassment could face misdemeanor charges in California. (Shutterstock)

Workplace violence is increasing: how to stay safe (Part 2)

Employees may obtain restraining orders to protect themselves against harassment, stalking



This week’s column is a follow-up to last week’s article on workplace violence including shootings, which was about rights and responsibilities of a business owner to create a safe workplace. You can get a copy by searching archives at SFExaminer.com or contacting me at Chris@dolanlawfirm.com. This column will inform you as to how you, as an individual and/or employee, can seek protection if you are concerned about workplace violence or the potential for violence from a family member or co-employee.

While employers are able to obtain Workplace Violence Restraining Orders, employees (and individuals outside of the workplace) are able to obtain Civil Harassment Restraining Orders to protect themselves against stalking, harassment and threats of violence.

California Code of Civil Procedure (C.C.P.) Section 527.6 provides an individual the right to obtain a temporary restraining order, and if warranted, a three-year restraining order and in some instances, criminal penalties may apply. The basis for restraining order can include, including a course of conduct that constitutes harassment of an individual via phone, text, email or other method of communication (California Penal Code Section 653(m)), stalking (California Penal Code Section 649.6), or harassment (C.C.P. Section 537.6 (b)(3).

What follows are the definitions of these behaviors so that an individual who suspects violence of these sorts can understand the law.

As stated in the California Code of Civil Procedure, “Course of conduct” is a pattern of conduct composed of a series of acts over a period of time, however short, evidencing a continuity of purpose, including following or stalking an individual, making harassing telephone calls to an individual, or sending harassing correspondence to an individual by any means, including, but not limited to, the use of public or private mails, interoffice mail, facsimile or email. Constitutionally protected activity is not included within the meaning of “course of conduct.”

The California Penal Code states that “Electronic harassment” is when someone, with intent to annoy, telephones or makes contact by means of an electronic communication device with another and addresses to or about the other person any obscene language or addresses to the other person any threat to inflict injury to the person or property of the person addressed, or any member of his or her family, is guilty of a misdemeanor.

Under the law a “stalker” is someone who willfully, maliciously and repeatedly follows or willfully and maliciously harasses another person and who makes a credible threat with the intent to place that person in reasonable fear for his or her safety, or the safety of his or her immediate family. In addition to obtaining a restraining order against a stalker, the stalker may also be guilty of a misdemeanor.

“Harassment” is unlawful violence, a credible threat of violence, or a knowing and willful course of conduct directed at a specific person that seriously alarms, annoys, or harasses the person, and that serves no legitimate purpose. The course of conduct must be that which would cause a reasonable person to suffer substantial emotional distress and must actually cause substantial emotional distress to the petitioner.

“Credible threat of violence” is a knowing and willful statement or course of conduct that would place a reasonable person in fear for the person’s safety or the safety of the person’s immediate family, and that serves no legitimate purpose.

There is a form which an individual can fill out, a Civil Harassment Training Order, created by the Judicial Council of California, Form CH-100 (just enter into your browser to locate the form.) Once Form CH-100 is stamped by the Court, a temporary restraining order pending hearing, may be obtained and provide protection for a period of time up to 25 days by which time a hearing for a permanent injunction must be set where the respondent may present evidence arguing against the execution of a permanent restraining order.

For a temporary or permanent order to have an effect, it must be served on the person to be restrained (the respondent) and the police. You should not be the one to serve the respondent as they may react violently.

A temporary restraining order goes into effect immediately and the respondent (harasser, stalker, etc.), is immediately ordered to stay away from the protected parties (which can include family members and animals). The temporary restraining order can include orders enjoining a party from harassing, intimidating, molesting, attacking, striking, stalking, threatening, sexually assaulting, battering, abusing, telephoning, including, but not limited to, making annoying telephone calls, destroying personal property, contacting, either directly or indirectly, by mail or otherwise, or coming within a specified distance of, or disturbing the peace of, the petitioner.

The order can also result in the respondent having to surrender any guns, firearms and ammunition they may possess. Violation of a temporary or permanent restraining order can result, fines, arrest and incarceration.

Christopher B. Dolan is the owner of the Dolan Law Firm, PC. We serve clients throughout the San Francisco Bay Area and California from offices in San Francisco, Oakland and Los Angeles. Email questions and topics for future articles to: help@dolanlawfirm.com. Our work is no recovery, or also referred to as contingency-based. That means we collect no fee unless we obtain money for your damages and injuries.

Californiaworkplace harassment

If you find our journalism valuable and relevant, please consider joining our Examiner membership program.
Find out more at www.sfexaminer.com/join/

Just Posted

A 14-Mission Muni bus heads down Mission Street near Yerba Buena Gardens. (Kevin N. Hume/S.F. Examiner)
Pandemic experiments morph into long-term solutions for SF transit agency

The streets of San Francisco became real-time laboratories for The City’s public… Continue reading

Unable to connect to GPS server ‘blackpress.newsengin.com’
Debate reignites over San Francisco’s first public bank

Prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, momentum was building for San Francisco to… Continue reading

The San Francisco Giants are encouraging their fans to get the COVID-19 vaccine. (Chris Victorio | Special to The Examiner, 2021)
Giants to entice fans to get vaccinated with ticket giveaway starting Friday

The San Francisco Giants have partnered with the city to encourage their… Continue reading

San Francisco Archbishop Salvatore Cordileone supports denying communion to President Joe Biden. (Catholic Voice).
Weaponizing the wafer: Why San Francisco Archbishop opposes communion for Biden

By Don Lattin Given the chance, would San Francisco Archbishop Salvatore Cordileone… Continue reading

U.S. Court of Appeals order invalidated California’s ban on assault weapons. (Special to Bay City News/New Africa)
Federal Court of Appeals stays decision invalidating assault weapons ban

A three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth… Continue reading

Most Read