Ruling in Sanchez v. Torres in the Illinois Appellate Court

In August, Chicago Appleseed joined an amicus authored by the Domestic Violence Legal Empowerment and Appeals Project of the George Washington University Law School and attorneys at Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP filed before the Illinois Appellate court in Sanchez v. Torres. At issue in the case was whether it was proper for the trial court to issue a civil restraining order in a proceeding under the Illinois Domestic Violence Act of 1986 (IDVA) where the court had found a factual showing of abuse.

On January 26, 2016, the Court held it was improper to issue the civil restraining order, after a finding of abuse, where the statute states that “an order of protection  . . . shall issue” when “the court finds that petitioner has been abused by a family or household member”.

In its ruling, the Court first discusses that the IDVA itself adopts a liberal construction of its purposes to recognize domestic violence as a public harm and a crime; to acknowledge the prior failures of legal system to protect and assist victims; to improve the outcomes for victims and their families; and to expand civil and criminal remedies available to victims of domestic violence. The Court then delineates three types of orders of protection: emergency (14-21 days); interim (up to 30 days).

The ruling continues by examining the standard of proof for a finding of abuse as fact and determines that the trial court properly found that the petition had, in fact, shown abuse. Because the statute uses “shall”, it mandates the trial court to issue the order of protection upon a finding of abuse. Therefore, the trial court erred in issuing a civil restraining order.

After discussing the 19 possible remedies available under an order of protection, the Court reiterates the argument made in the amicus brief that “an order of protection affords an accessible pro se  process that victims can navigate more easily and affordably [than a civil restraining order].” (pp. 7-8) The Court further exposes the inadequacies of a civil restraining order where the statute calls for an order of protection.

Chicago Appleseed appreciates the work of the Domestic Violence Legal Empowerment and Appeals Project  and the attorneys at Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP in drafting the amicus and appreciates the opportunity to join with seven other organizations in signing the brief. The ruling is an important affirmation of the purposes of the IDVA, including address prior failures of the courts to protect victims and hold abusers accountable, while ensuring the safety of victims and their children going forward.

Other signatories to the amicus were: Loyola University Civitas ChildLaw Center, the Chicago Metropolitan Battered Women’s Network, the Sargent Shriver National Center on Poverty Lawthe John Marshall Law School Domestic Violence Clinical Advocacy ProgramChicago Volunteer Legal Services and LifeSpan Center for Legal Services & Advocacy.