DCLSE)

1
MAY 0 2 2008
2 EL
Omctr
3 SUPERl&k COURT

4
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORN1
5
COUNTY OF MARIN
6

7
ALAN BOXER, Consolidated Cases Nos. CV 051280
8 CV 051282
Plaintiff, )
9
v.
)
10 ) ORDERS AFTER HEARING TO STOP
) HARASSMENT
11 LAUREN BOXER, AKA LAUREN )
STRANAHAN,
12
Defendant.
13

14

15
ALAN BOXER,
16
Plaintiff,
17
v.
18

19 LEE R. STRANAHAN,

20 Defendant.

21

22

23
On May 1, 2008, these consolidated matters came on for an evidentiary hearing on the
24
Plaintiffs Requests for Orders to Stop Harassment. Four witnesses testified, to wit: the Plaintiff
25 and his wife, and both of the Defendants, who are the Plaintiffs daughter and son-in-law

26 Exhibits were admitted into evidence.

27 While it is quite clear that the Defendants do in fact communicate about the Plaintiff in £

28 negative manner and disseminate court documents concerning him over the Internet and that

ORDER AFTER HEARING TO STOP HARASSMENT

 1 these communications are understandably upsetting to the Plaintiff, there is not clear and

2 convincing evidence that these communications legally constitute harassment. Rather, it appear:

3 that they constitute the Defendants' legitimate, although perhaps unpleasant, exercise of theii

4 right to communicate about their opinions about the Plaintiff and his alleged acts and omission

5 in the past and his petitions for retraining orders against them.

6 Accordingly, the Requests for Orders to Stop Harassment must be denied.

7 GOOD CAUSE APPEARING THEREFORE, it is ordered that:

8 1. The Requests for Orders to Stop Harassment are DENIED; and

9 2. The Temporary Restraining Orders that were reissued on May 1, 2008 are VACATED

10

11 Date: May
w 2,. 2008
Roy O^Chernus
Commissioner
13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

ORDER AFTER HEARING TO STOP HARASSMENT