Santa Cruz County, California — October 27, 2026 — Wade Litigation attorney Xochitl Urena secured another significant courtroom victory after successfully defending a client against an attempt to renew a domestic violence restraining order for an additional five years.
Following a contested hearing in Santa Cruz County Superior Court, Judge Katherine Hansen denied the petitioner’s request to renew the restraining order and also rejected the petitioner’s request for attorney’s fees.
The ruling represented a significant victory for Wade Litigation’s client, who faced the possibility of remaining subject to a domestic violence restraining order for another five years.
Petitioner Seeks to Extend Restraining Order for Five Additional Years
The case involved a domestic violence restraining order that had originally been issued against Wade Litigation’s client for a five-year period and expired in June 2026.
The protected party subsequently sought to renew the restraining order for another five years, alleging that the client had violated the original order and engaged in conduct that justified continued protection.
Among other allegations, the petitioner claimed that the client had sent improper text messages, behaved erratically during supervised visitation, and engaged in other concerning conduct.
The petitioner also made allegations involving weapons and criminal charges.
However, according to the defense, the petitioner failed to produce sufficient supporting evidence to establish that renewal of the restraining order was warranted.
Urena Successfully Challenges Evidence Supporting Renewal
During the contested hearing before Judge Hansen, Urena challenged the legal and factual basis for extending the restraining order.
Although acknowledging the seriousness of the circumstances underlying the original order, Urena argued that the petitioner had failed to establish sufficient grounds for renewal.
Urena emphasized that her client had completed court-ordered domestic violence classes and challenged the petitioner’s allegations of subsequent restraining order violations.
She also pointed out that the petitioner had not produced the text messages allegedly constituting violations of the original order or sufficient evidence supporting several other allegations.
Additionally, Urena challenged the petitioner’s reliance on speculative observations concerning her client’s conduct, arguing that such testimony did not establish a sufficient basis for extending the restraining order.
Urena further emphasized that the petitioner acknowledged having had no direct communication with the client for several years.
Court Denies Restraining Order Renewal and Attorney’s Fees
Following the presentation of arguments, Judge Hansen denied the request to renew the domestic violence restraining order.
The Court also denied the petitioner’s request for attorney’s fees.
The rulings resulted in two favorable outcomes for Wade Litigation’s client: the restraining order was not renewed, and the requested attorney’s fees were denied.
The decision brought the contested renewal proceeding to a successful conclusion for the defense.
Strategic Advocacy Produces Favorable Result
The case demonstrates the importance of carefully examining the evidence and applicable legal requirements when opposing a request to renew a domestic violence restraining order.
Through focused legal arguments and challenges to the evidentiary support for the petitioner’s allegations, Urena successfully advocated against the requested five-year extension.
The outcome represents another favorable courtroom result for Urena and Wade Litigation in contested family law proceedings.
About Wade Litigation
Wade Litigation, A Professional Corporation, is a California law firm representing individuals and businesses in civil litigation, business disputes, family law matters, probate and trust litigation, and appeals. The firm is committed to providing effective legal representation, strategic courtroom advocacy, and personalized service to clients throughout California.
Clients Throughout California
Fields Marked With An ”*” Are Required