I went to the police a couple of weeks ago after my boyfriend attacked me. He was charged with 3rd degree assult and domestic violence. He has hired an attorney and his case goes in front of a judge in about one month. I have a temporary restraining order against him which will be longer after he is convicted. After his first appearance, I was served with an eviction notice by him. We live together in a house that he owns, but we have a written living agreement that states that I have the right to live there until Feb. 2013 even if we are not dating anymore. Does he have the right to evict me when I am the victim of his violence? The restraining order notes that he is the one who has to be out of the house, but he is claiming that since he is the legal owner of the house that he should be the one to live there. I would leave, but I have no where else to go right now.

This is an interesting situation. Since the restraining order stated that he had to move out, and you have that agreement I'm not sure he can obtain an eviction order (note, what he sent you was a VACATE order, only a court can issue an eviction order). On the other hand, it is his property and you should plan on moving ASAP.

If you don't have an attorney I would get one. You need to consult someone familiar with local laws and courts (ANY question on law needs to include your general locale as laws vary by area. ) You can try a local law school, many have clinics to help people.

But what is going to probably happen is you don't vacate by the date listed. He then goes to court for an eviction order. This will involve a hearing. At the hearing, you point out to the judge that a) the restraining order required that he move out and b) you have a written agreement that allows you to stay in 2/13. My guess is the court will side with you. At the worst, you will be told you have to move, but will be given more time to do so. You may also be required to pay him rent.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pamb93

... we have a written living agreement that states that I have the right to live there until Feb. 2013 even if we are not dating anymore. ...

---

I've got to say: that sounds real fishy.

Why would he have signed such an agreement, including the "even if we are not dating anymore" language.

And if I were the judge, I would ask: what is the consideration? In other words, what would he benefit by agreeing to that? Just for your information, an agreement (a/k/a a contract) is not enforceable without consideration from both parties.

I specifically recall an old 19th-century case I studied in law school. A woman received a letter which provided that if she would move into a particular cabin, she would be allowed to live there. The court found that there was no consideration, and she could not enforce the promise made in the letter.