Fernando v. New York City Tr. Auth.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• defendant cannot be found in violation of order where he attempted to leave promptly, but was restrained from doing so
• instruction inadequate where it \left the jury without guidance as to what constituted a violation\ of c. 209A no-contact order
• jury could have found that the contact in question “was either incidental to a permitted activity . . . or an accidental, mistaken, or unknowing violation ... as opposed to a contact that is neither incidental nor accidental”
• “defendant cannot be convicted of violating a ‘no contact’ order issued under c. 209A where the contact occurs in circumstances where the defendant did not know, and could not reasonably have been expected to know, that the protected person would be present”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).