On August 26, 2026, the Court of Appeals of Georgia ruled on a case concerning a stalking protective order filed by Ashley Tatum against Paris Bennett-Stroud. The court decided to grant Bennett-Stroud’s application for discretionary review of the order. This ruling allows Bennett-Stroud to appeal the trial court's decision, which had initially granted Tatum a 12-month protective order.
The case is significant as it highlights the legal processes involved in stalking protective orders and the rights of individuals seeking to contest such orders. The ruling affects both parties involved and sets a precedent for how similar cases may be handled in the future.
Background
Ashley Tatum filed a petition for a stalking protective order against Paris Bennett-Stroud, prompting the trial court to issue a 12-month protective order under Georgia law, specifically OCGA § 16-5-94. Stalking protective orders are designed to protect individuals from harassment and threats, allowing them to seek legal recourse when they feel unsafe.
The court documents indicated that there was no familial relationship between Tatum and Bennett-Stroud, which is an important factor in determining the nature of the case. The absence of a domestic relations context meant that the case did not fall under the discretionary review procedures typically applied to such matters. This distinction allowed Bennett-Stroud’s appeal to be considered directly, rather than through the more complicated discretionary review process.
The case reached the Court of Appeals after Bennett-Stroud filed a timely application for review following the trial court's decision. The court's decision to grant the application is based on the interpretation of Georgia law regarding protective orders and the right to appeal such decisions.
The Ruling
The Court of Appeals ruled to grant Bennett-Stroud’s application for discretionary review, stating that the protective order did not arise from a domestic relations matter. The court referenced previous cases, noting, “Because the protective order does not appear to arise out of a domestic relations matter that would subject it to the discretionary review procedures, it is directly appealable.” This ruling clarifies the legal standing of protective orders and the rights of individuals to contest them.
The court further emphasized that Bennett-Stroud has ten days from the date of the order to file a notice of appeal in the trial court. If she has already filed a notice, no further action is needed. This directive is crucial for ensuring that Bennett-Stroud can proceed with her appeal without unnecessary delays.
Impact
This ruling has significant implications for both parties involved in the case. For Tatum, the initial protective order remains in effect until the appeal process is concluded. For Bennett-Stroud, the court's decision to allow an appeal provides her with an opportunity to challenge the protective order and present her case in a higher court.
Moreover, this ruling sets a precedent for future cases involving stalking protective orders in Georgia. It clarifies the legal framework surrounding such orders and the process by which individuals can appeal them. This could encourage more individuals to seek protective orders, knowing they have a clear path to contest them if necessary.
What’s Next
Bennett-Stroud can appeal the decision made by the trial court regarding the protective order. The timeline for this appeal is set at ten days from the court's order. Details regarding any related cases or further developments were not available in the court filing.