Your case is unique, but you are not alone.
About 41,000 new cases are filed in U.S. courts every weekday. Behind each one is a person trying to understand what happens next. Here’s what the public record can tell you about this matter — and about the people deciding it.
Is this judge more likely to rule for the plaintiff or the defendant in cases of this type?
How has your attorney actually performed in front of this judge?
AICasePredict surfaces patterns from public court records. We don’t predict outcomes and we don’t recommend changing your attorney — that’s a conversation for you and them. We just show you what the record already says.
Full Analytics Report
- Complete case narrative
- Judge details and rulings
- Case disposition and outcome
- All docket entries
- Related cases and filings
Case Information
Docket Entries
- ###PETITION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER
- OKLAHOMA COURT INFORMATION SYSTEM FEE - EFFECTIVE 07/01/04
- OK COURT APPOINTED SPECIAL ADVOCATES
- 10% OF CASA TO COURT CLERK REVOLVING FUND
- OK COUNCIL ON JUDICIAL COMPLAINTS REVOLVING FUND
- 10% OF COJC TO COURT CLERK REVOLVING FUND
- COURTHOUSE SECURITY FEE
- 10% OF CHSC TO COURT CLERK REVOLVING FUND
- STATE JUDICIAL REV. FUND INTERPRETER & TRANSLATOR SERVICES
- 15% TO DISTRICT COURT REVOLVING FUND
- COURT CLERK PRESERVATION FUND
- ISSUED EPO - HRG 7/28/25 @ 9AM
- ORIGINAL EPO & RETURN - DEF SVD 7/17/25
- DS/MIN 7-28-25 PO DKT LUTON: PLT P. DEF P W/ ATTY BREEANN RICE. MATTER COMES ON FOR EPO HEARING. UPON HEARING-WITS SWORN [(PLT)DIRECT/CROSS) (R.R.) DIRECT BY DEF'S COUNSEL/CROSS (DEF) DIRECT BY DEF'S COUNSEL/CROSS, TESTIMONY TAKEN, ARGUMENTS HEARD. THE COURT FINDS THAT: PLT ALLEGES DOM. VIOLENCE AND HARASSMENT. PARTIES HAVE AN ONGOING DIVORCE FD-25-18 IN FRONT OF JUDGE HUNTER THAT IS HIGH CONFLICT. TITLE 22 IS PROTECTIVE ORDER LAW. ACCORDING TO STATUTE “HARASSMENT” MEANS A KNOWING AND WILLFUL COURSE OR PATTERN OF CONDUCT BY A FAMILY OR HOUSEHOLD MEMBER OR AN INDIVIDUAL WHO IS OR HAS BEEN INVOLVED IN A DATING RELATIONSHIP WITH THE PERSON, DIRECTED AT A SPECIFIC PERSON WHICH SERIOUSLY ALARMS OR ANNOYS THE PERSON, AND WHICH SERVES NO LEGITIMATE PURPOSE. THE COURSE OF CONDUCT MUST BE SUCH AS WOULD CAUSE A REASONABLE PERSON TO SUFFER SUBSTANTIAL EMOTIONAL DISTRESS AND MUST ACTUALLY CAUSE SUBSTANTIAL DISTRESS TO THE PERSON. THE DEFENITION FOR “DOMESTIC ABUSE” MEANS ANY ACT OF PHYSICAL HARM OR THE THREAT OF IMMINENT PHYSICAL HARM WHICH IS COMMITTED BY AN ADULT, EMANCIPATED MINOR, OR MINOR CHILD THIRTEEN (13) YEARS OF AGE OR OLDER AGAINST ANOTHER ADULT, EMANCIPATED MINOR OR MINOR CHILD WHO IS CURRENTLY OR WAS PREVIOUSLY AN INTIMATE PARTNER OR FAMILY OR HOUSEHOLD MEMBER. THERE HAS BEEN A LOT GOING ON IN THIS RELATIONSHIP FOR A LONG TIME; BUT WITH WHAT HAS BEEN BROUGHT TO THIS COURT ROOM TODAY IS EVIDENCE THAT IS CONTARADICTORY TO EACH OTHER. CONSIDERING BOTH PARTIES TESTIMONY, THAT DOES CONTRADICT EACH OTHER AND ADDITIONALLY, R.R. TESTIFIES THAT DOM ABUSE DID NOT TAKE PLACE. LASTLY, PURSUANT TO 1984 OK CIV APP 25, 686 P.2D 990, MARQUETTE V. MARQUETTE DISCUSSES WHAT IS A PROTECTIVE ORDER IS AND THAT IT IS A CIVIL MATTER/PROCEEDING NOT CRIMINAL CASE. WE DO NOT NEED BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT AS IN CRIMINAL JUST CLEAR AND CONVINCING EVIDENCE. PURUSANT TO THE REASONING SUPRA THERE IS IN-SUFFICIENT EVIDENCE FOR FINAL PROTECTIVE ORDER. EPO DISMISSED; COST WAIVED.
- MINUTE ORDER
- FEES ADJUSTED TO ZERO
- FEES ADJUSTED TO ZERO
- FEES ADJUSTED TO ZERO
- FEES ADJUSTED TO ZERO
- FEES ADJUSTED TO ZERO
- FEES ADJUSTED TO ZERO
- FEES ADJUSTED TO ZERO
- FEES ADJUSTED TO ZERO
- FEES ADJUSTED TO ZERO
- FEES ADJUSTED TO ZERO
- FEES ADJUSTED TO ZERO
- FEES ADJUSTED TO ZERO
Get Free Case Details
Enter your email to receive case information including parties, docket entries, and status updates.
By submitting you agree to our Privacy Policy.
Need this case removed? Enter your email above — the confirmation email includes a case removal link.
Legal Analytics Has Been Featured In
