
420 Jericho Tpke.,
Ste. 222, Jericho, NY 11753 Phone: (516) 942-3200 Fax: (516) 942-3366
![]()
DUE
PROCESS REQUIREMENTS OF A STAY AWAY ORDER OF PROTECTION
by: Mace H. Greenfield
When an Order of Protection is issued with a stay away order, putting a party
out of his or her home, that person is entitled to a prompt evidentiary
hearing. This is because the excluded person’s property and liberty rights are
directly and adversely affected by the stay away provision. Thus, the excluded
person does have an injury to protected rights of property and association (to
wit: cannot associated with his or her own children and or spouse) and thereby
giving that person standing to make a constitutional challenge. The standing
is also based on the excluded person having been aggrieved by the feature of the
Family Court Act that permitted the stay away provision to be issued, in that he
or she cannot go home and cannot see his or her children and or spouse.
The excluded person cannot go home, thereby not being able to enjoy his or her
associational liberties as regards his or her children. If the excluded person
owns, in part or whole, the home from which he or she was excluded, then the
stay away provision also excludes him or her from real property in which he or
she otherwise shares an ownership interest and has a right to possession of.
Analogy of this property right can be drawn when the excluded person’s name is
on a lease and is a signatory to the lease for the property that he or she has
been excluded from.
The State is mandated to these due process considerations when seeking to
restrict such liberties and rights . Whenever State action deprives a citizen
of his or her liberty or property, due process requires that he or she be
afforded the opportunity to be heard in a timely manner. The hearing must be
provided at a meaningful time and in a meaningful manner. Only in
extraordinary situations may the hearing be postponed until after the
deprivation has occurred. The requirements of due process and fair procedure
are flexible as to the timing and formality of the hearing, as maybe called for
by the particular situation.
Thus, the questions begging to be asked, are:
1.
When no
eminent threat of violence or harm exists and no actual harm has occurred, on
what right or basis can Family Court exclude a respondent by issuing a stay away
order prior to holding a hearing without violating the respondent’s due process
rights as set forth above?
2.
When a
hearing has not been had nor waived by a respondent, on what right or basis can
Family Court continue to exclude a respondent by continuing a stay away order
without violating the respondent’s due process rights as set forth above?
Obviously, constitutionally it appears that it cannot, but yet it does anyway.