[PART I. 
GENERAL PROVISIONS]



 



Revision Note



 



  Part designation added by revisor.



 



§586-1  Definitions.  As used in this
chapter:



"Dating relationship" means a
romantic, courtship, or engagement relationship, often but not necessarily
characterized by actions of an intimate or sexual nature, but does not include
a casual acquaintanceship or ordinary fraternization between persons in a
business or social context.



"Domestic abuse" means:



(1)  Physical harm, bodily injury, assault, or the
threat of imminent physical harm, bodily injury, or assault, extreme
psychological abuse or malicious property damage between family or household
members; or



(2)  Any act which would constitute an offense under
section 709-906, or under part V or VI of chapter 707 committed against a minor
family or household member by an adult family or household member.



"Extreme psychological abuse" means
an intentional or knowing course of conduct directed at an individual that
seriously alarms or disturbs consistently or continually bothers the
individual, and that serves no legitimate purpose; provided that such course of
conduct would cause a reasonable person to suffer extreme emotional distress.



"Family or household member" means
spouses or reciprocal beneficiaries, former spouses or former reciprocal
beneficiaries, persons who have a child in common, parents, children, persons
related by consanguinity, persons jointly residing or formerly residing in the
same dwelling unit, and persons who have or have had a dating relationship.



"Malicious property damage" means an
intentional or knowing damage to the property of another, without his consent,
with an intent to thereby cause emotional distress. [L 1982, c 123, pt of §2;
am L 1987, c 359, §2; am L 1997, c 383, §64; am L 1998, c 172, §1; am L 2000, c
186, §2]



 



Revision Note



 



  Definitions rearranged.



 



Case Notes



 



  Where defendant testified at defendant's criminal trial that
complainant was defendant's niece and that they had formerly resided together
at the home of defendant's father, this testimony established that defendant
and complainant met the definition of "family or household member"
under this section; thus, family court had jurisdiction to issue the protection
order under §586-5.5 and the protection order was valid.  112 H. 136 (App.),
144 P.3d 584.