By Jaime Driggs & Dylan Wallace

Minnesota provides two primary civil remedies to address safety and harassment concerns: Orders for Protection (OFPs) and Harassment Restraining Orders (HROs). While both can impose no-contact and stay-away conditions, they arise under different standards, protect against different conduct, and follow distinct procedures. Understanding the right fit—and how to obtain it—can be critical to receiving timely and effective relief.

Orders for Protection (OFPs)

Purpose and Eligibility

An OFP addresses domestic abuse within a defined relationship. Generally, eligible petitioners include family or household members such as spouses or former spouses, persons who share a child, persons related by blood, those who have resided together, or those in a significant romantic or sexual relationship. The petitioner must allege an act of domestic abuse, which typically includes physical harm, bodily injury, assault, fear of imminent physical harm, terroristic threats, criminal sexual conduct, or interference with an emergency call, committed by a family or household member.

Standards and Relief

To obtain an OFP, the petitioner must present facts showing domestic abuse occurred or is reasonably feared. Courts may grant emergency ex parte relief based on sworn allegations demonstrating an immediate need for protection. Final relief, after a hearing, can include no contact; exclusion from the home; temporary custody and parenting time parameters; support-related measures; firearms restrictions; and other safety-focused terms tailored to the circumstances.

Practical Considerations

• Specificity matters: Provide dates, locations, injuries, threats, police reports, medical records, and witness names where available. These cases often turn on credibility determinations, so the more direct and documentary evidence the better.
• Parenting implications: Courts may adjust custody and parenting time on a temporary basis to ensure child safety. However, filing for an OFP should not be used as a tactic to gain an advantage in a custody proceeding.
• Firearms: The court may impose firearms-related restrictions consistent with safety needs.
• Extensions and modifications: Parties can seek to extend, modify, or vacate an OFP based on changed circumstances and ongoing safety concerns.

Harassment Restraining Orders (HROs)

Purpose and Eligibility

An HRO addresses harassment that occurs outside of the domestic abuse context. It is available against neighbors, acquaintances, former friends, strangers, family members, or others. Harassment generally includes repeated and unwanted acts, words, or gestures that adversely affect safety, security, or privacy, or a single egregious act such as certain explicit threats.

Standards and Relief

The petitioner must show harassment occurred and is likely to continue without court intervention, and that their safety, security, and/or privacy has been or will continue be affected. As with OFPs, a court can issue an ex parte temporary HRO upon adequate sworn allegations. Final relief after hearing can include no contact; stay-away provisions from home, work, or school; and other conditions needed to prevent continued harassment.

Practical Considerations

• Evidence-driven: Preserve communications, screenshots, caller logs, and any documentation showing a pattern or a qualifying serious incident. Like with OFPs, the more direct and documentary evidence you have the better.
• Narrow tailoring: Courts calibrate distance and contact limits to stop harassment while avoiding unnecessary restraints.
• Modifications and extensions: Parties can request changes or extensions based on ongoing conduct or new circumstances.

Choosing Between an OFP and an HRO

• Relationship: Use an OFP when the respondent is a family or household member that has committed or is threatening to commit domestic abuse; use an HRO when the respondent is not a family or household member or if the family or household member is harassing you but not threatening domestic abuse.
• Conduct: OFPs target domestic abuse; HROs target harassment, including persistent unwanted contact or a severe single incident in non-domestic settings.
• Available relief: OFPs may include family-law related measures such as temporary custody; HROs typically focus on no-contact and stay-away provisions.

Closing Thoughts

Both OFPs and HROs are designed to provide swift protection. Success often turns on clear, corroborated facts and timely filing. Petitioners should prepare detailed affidavits and gather supporting evidence; respondents should promptly review service documents and assert defenses at the hearing. Where safety is at issue, courts can move quickly—ex parte when necessary—and then refine relief after a full hearing. At Henson Efron, our attorneys are well-versed in these processes and procedures and are available to assist in both filing and defending against both OFP and HRO petitions.

The purpose of this article is merely to provide general information and should not be construed as legal advice.