Barbee v. Barbee

MURPHY, Chief Judge. This case involves Maryland’s Domestic Violence Act (the Act), Maryland Code (1984, 1987 Cum.Supp.), §§ 4-501 ⁶²¹ through 4-515 of the Family Law Article, and whether appeals arising under its provisions from the District Court of Maryland to a circuit court are to be heard on the record or de novo. I The Act, in § 4-504, authorizes a “household member” to file a sworn petition, either in a circuit court or in the District Court of Maryland, alleging “abuse ... by another household member.” 1 Section 4-501(e) defines “ ‘Household members’ ” to mean “spouses, parents, children, or blood relatives who live together at the time of an act of abuse”; “ ‘Abuse’ ” is defined in subsection (b) in terms of acts causing or threatening to cause serious bodily harm to a household member. “ ‘Family home’ ” is defined in subsection (d) to mean the principal residence of the household members. If, upon review of the petition filed under § 4-504, the court finds that a household member has been abused, § 4-505 authorizes it, in an ex parte proceeding, to enter a temporary protective order prohibiting, inter alia, abuse of the household member, requiring that the alleged abuser vacate the family home, and awarding temporary custody of a minor household member.

Section 4-506 permits the “household member” against whom the temporary protective order has been filed to be heard on the question of whether the court should issue a final protective order. That section also authorizes the court to “grant a protective order to stop the abuse” if it finds “by clear and convincing evidence that the alleged abuse has occurred.” Violation of ⁶²² protective orders may be punished under § 4-507 by contempt, criminal prosecution, imprisonment or fine or both. II Nancy Barbee, a Baltimore City resident, filed a “Petition for Protection Against Domestic Violence” in the District Court of Maryland, sitting in Baltimore City, against Joseph Barbee, her husband. According to the pleadings, the husband then resided in Henderson, Maryland, rather than in the family home in Baltimore City.

The wife alleged that the husband struck her with his fists on November 24, 1986 outside of a courtroom; that he threatened her two days later at her place of employment; and that her two oldest children were afraid of the husband. The District Court, by temporary ex parte order, directed that the husband refrain from abusing the wife and other household members. At a subsequent hearing, at which the husband was represented by counsel, the District Court issued a final order that the husband refrain from abusing the wife, that temporary custody of the children residing within the family home be awarded to the wife, and that the husband not contact or visit the family for any reason. The husband appealed to the Circuit Court for Baltimore City, pursuant to § 12-401 of the Courts Article.

That section, which governs appeals from final judgments entered in the District Court, provides in subsection (d): “(d) De novo and on record appeals.—In a civil case in which the amount in controversy exceeds $1,000 exclusive of interest, costs, and attorney’s fees if attorney’s fees are recoverable by law or contract, and in any case in which the parties so agree, an appeal shall be heard on the record made in the District Court. In every other case, including a criminal case in which sentence has been imposed or suspended following a plea of nolo contendere or guilty, and an appeal in a municipal infraction or Code ■ violation case, an appeal shall be tried de novo.” ⁶²³ The wife moved to dismiss the appeal. She claimed that the case involved an “amount in controversy” in excess of $1,000 and consequently had to be tried on the record, rather than de novo. She urged that the husband’s failure to provide the requisite transcript of District Court proceedings required that the appeal be dismissed.

The court (Johnson, J.) agreed and dismissed the appeal. We subsequently granted the husband’s petition for certiorari (see § 12-305 of the Courts Article) to determine whether an appeal under the Domestic Violence Act, as here, involves an “amount in controversy” in excess of $1,000 which must be tried on the record. Ill Petitions filed under the Domestic Violence Act are plainly civil cases, equitable in nature. In considering the “amount in controversy” provisions of § 12-401(d) of the Courts Article, as applied to appeals from final District Court orders under the Act, we seek to ascertain and effectuate legislative intent, the primary source of which is found in the language of the statute.

In Re Ramont K., 305 Md. 482 , 505 A.2d 507 (1986). This language must be given its natural and ordinary signification, bearing in mind the statutory purpose, aim and objectives. Kaczorowski v. City of Baltimore, 309 Md. 505 , 525 A.2d 628 (1987). That the Act was designed to aid victims of domestic abuse by providing an immediate and effective nonmonetary remedy is readily apparent.

To this end the Legislature empowered courts to order that the abuse be stopped, that the abuser