NASHVILLE CRIMINAL LAWYERS | CASE STUDIES
PRACTICE AREA(S):
CASE BRIEF:
Civil defense of an Order of Protection case study of a client who was accused of stalking and threatening the mother of his children and former girlfriend in Nashville.
THE STAKES: If granted, our client would have been completely at the mercy of his ex-girlfriend if he ever wanted to see his children.
THE GOAL: Our client also needed and wanted an Order of Protection against her, so we filed an order of protection for him and had them heard at the same time.
CHARGES:
Order of protection
CHARGE CLASSIFICATION(S): Civil Litigation Attorney
RELEVANT LAWS FOR CHARGE:
OUTCOME / RESULT: The father's sense of safety is restored and he can see his children without any fear of false allegations being made by the mother. We got the Protection Order against him dismissed & won our cross petition (competing Order of Protection) against the ex-girlfriend/mother.
PRACTICE AREA(S):
CASE BRIEF:
Order of protection case study of a client accused of stalking his ex-girlfriend via texts, accessing her email, and other online accounts.
THE STAKES: Our client had zero criminal history and was a high-profile individual.
THE GOAL: To protect our client’s public profile and safeguard him from unnecessary risk, our goal was to have the order of protection dismissed and, if possible, expunged.
CHARGES:
Ex Parte Order of Protection and Order of Protection.
CHARGE CLASSIFICATION(S): Order of Protection
RELEVANT LAWS FOR CHARGE:
OUTCOME / RESULT: Without even having to have a hearing, our client was completely vindicated without any negative public attention. He is free to exercise any rights he maintained in the company and participate in the community he helped create.
PRACTICE AREA(S):
CASE BRIEF:
Criminal defense case study of a client charged with misdemeanor theft and publicly defamed (by the accuser) after taking a stray cat that attacked his cat on his property out into the woods for disposal in Cheatham County, Tennessee.
THE STAKES: This was a small-town affair. The accuser took to social media and stirred people into a frenzy that resulted in death threats to our client. Our client’s reputation and safety were in jeopardy. The possible penalties for the charge included a year in jail and a $2,500 fine, but the damage to his reputation and associated threats on his safety were also huge factors.
THE GOAL: Our client wanted to be completely vindicated AND pursue a lawsuit against the accuser for malicious prosecution. Because an essential element of a claim for malicious prosecution is the “dismissal” of the case for which you were wrongfully prosecuted, our goal was dismissal.
CHARGES:
Theft under $1,000.
CHARGE CLASSIFICATION(S): CLASS A MISDEMEANOR
RELEVANT LAWS FOR CHARGE:
OUTCOME / RESULT: Theft charge dismissed and all of the client’s remedies against the false accuser preserved.