A New York Family Court has ruled that protective orders can be issued for longer than two years if both parties consent, even without a judicial finding of wrongdoing. This decision, made on May 6, 2026, affects how family offense cases are handled in the court system, particularly for those seeking protection from domestic violence.
The ruling emerged from the case Matter of H.I. v. I.S. (File No. 329472), where the petitioner, H.I., sought protection from her husband, I.S. The court's decision clarifies the application of Family Court Act § 842, which previously limited the duration of protective orders issued after hearings to a maximum of two years unless specific conditions were met.
Background
The parties involved in this case are H.I. and I.S., a married couple with four children. In November 2024, H.I. filed a family offense petition against I.S., alleging various offenses. The court initially issued a temporary order of protection that required I.S. to refrain from committing further offenses against H.I.
In May 2025, H.I. filed another petition, leading to a second temporary order of protection. Later, in July 2025, she filed a violation petition against I.S. for allegedly breaching the temporary order. As the case progressed toward a scheduled hearing in April 2026, both parties reached a tentative settlement, leading to the current ruling.
The Ruling
Judge Robert A. Markoff presided over the case and ultimately ruled that the durational limits set by Family Court Act § 842 do not apply to orders of protection issued by consent. The court stated, "In family offense proceedings, the family court may issue an order of protection on consent for a period more than two years without a judicial finding of aggravated circumstances or a judicial finding that the respondent violated a valid order of protection." This ruling allows for protective orders to be issued for up to three years if both parties agree.
The court's decision emphasizes that the language of the Family Court Act does not impose a duration limit on consent orders. The judge noted that applying such limitations would undermine the purpose of family offense proceedings, which aim to provide swift protection from domestic violence.
Impact
This ruling has significant implications for future family offense cases in New York. It allows individuals seeking protection to negotiate longer orders without the need for lengthy hearings, which can be emotionally taxing and costly. The decision streamlines the process and encourages settlements, potentially reducing court congestion.
Furthermore, the ruling clarifies that consent orders are not subject to the same durational limitations as those issued after hearings, which could lead to more individuals feeling empowered to seek protection without the fear of a limited timeframe. This change may also influence how attorneys advise their clients in similar situations, promoting the use of consent agreements in family court.
What's Next
While this ruling provides clarity on the issuance of protective orders, it remains to be seen if it will be challenged in higher courts. The court filing did not indicate whether an appeal is planned. However, the decision sets a precedent that could affect similar cases in the future.