The Washington Court of Appeals recently upheld a domestic violence protection order (DVPO) against John "Jack" Loop, affirming that his ex-wife, Lisa Loop, had sufficient grounds for the order due to a history of abuse. The court's decision, made on November 9, 2026, protects Lisa from Jack for five years, highlighting the serious nature of domestic violence cases and the importance of legal protections for victims.

This ruling affects not only Lisa but also sets a precedent for future domestic violence cases in Washington. It reinforces the legal framework that allows victims to seek protection from their abusers, even if the abuse occurred in the past. The court's decision emphasizes that a history of violence is enough to justify a protection order, irrespective of the respondent's current location.

Background

Lisa and Jack Loop were married in 2006 and have one adult child together. Their relationship deteriorated over time, culminating in a violent incident on December 7, 2020, when Jack assaulted Lisa. During this incident, Jack strangled Lisa and attempted to silence her as she called for help. Following this event, Jack was arrested and later pleaded guilty to assault in the fourth degree.

After the assault, Jack moved out of their home and filed for divorce. A no-contact order was issued, prohibiting him from contacting Lisa or coming near her. However, Jack continued to engage in troubling behavior, including stalking Lisa and violating the no-contact order on multiple occasions. This pattern of harassment included tracking Lisa's movements and making unannounced visits, leading Lisa to fear for her safety.

As the expiration date of a previous restraining order approached, Lisa sought a more permanent solution by filing a petition for a protection order on September 8, 2025. This petition was supported by various documents, including police reports and statements from the dissolution proceedings. A hearing was held on November 25, 2025, where both parties presented their arguments.

The Ruling

The court ruled in favor of Lisa, issuing a domestic violence protection order that lasts until November 25, 2030. Chief Judge Hazelrigg stated, "Lisa was assaulted and strangled on 12/7/2020 as alleged in the petition," confirming the court's findings of domestic violence. The ruling also noted that Jack had violated the no-contact order and continued to surveil Lisa, which heightened her concerns for safety.

Jack appealed the decision, arguing that the trial court had abused its discretion. However, the court found that the evidence presented was substantial enough to support the issuance of the protection order. The court emphasized that the law does not require recent incidents of violence to justify a protection order, stating that "the court shall issue a protection order if it finds by a preponderance of the evidence that the petitioner has proved the required criteria." This ruling highlights the legal recognition of ongoing threats and the importance of protecting victims from potential harm.

Impact

This ruling has significant implications for domestic violence victims in Washington. It reinforces the legal standards for obtaining protection orders, allowing courts to consider a history of abuse without requiring evidence of imminent harm. The decision may encourage more victims to seek legal protection, knowing that their past experiences of violence can be sufficient grounds for a DVPO.

Moreover, the court's ruling sends a clear message about the seriousness of domestic violence and the legal system's commitment to protecting victims. It affirms that individuals who have a history of abusive behavior can be held accountable, even if they claim to have changed or relocated. This case may also influence how future courts handle similar cases, potentially leading to more stringent enforcement of protection orders.

What's Next

Jack Loop has the option to appeal the court's decision further, although the likelihood of success appears limited given the strong evidence presented against him. There are no related cases pending at this time. The court's ruling stands as a significant legal precedent in the ongoing fight against domestic violence.