Someone filed a domestic violence restraining order against you. Your first instinct is to defend yourself—to show up at the hearing and prove the allegations are false. That instinct is correct as far as it goes.
However, if you were also abused by the person who filed against you, defending is only half of what you should be doing.
This article explains mutual restraining orders in California, why the decision to file your own DVRO rather than merely responding can change the entire character of the case, and how the law's rules on mutual restraining orders actually work. It is written for the person who has been served and is deciding what to do, resting on one condition that never changes: you should only seek a restraining order if you were genuinely abused.
Mutual Restraining Orders: The Short Answer
A mutual restraining order is a court order issued against both parties, restraining each of them from abusing the other. California does not hand these out easily.
Under California Family Code section 6305, a court cannot issue a mutual order unless:
- Both parties filed written requests: Both parties filed their own written requests for a restraining order on mandatory Judicial Council forms.
- Detailed primary aggressor findings: The court makes detailed written findings that both parties acted as a primary aggressor and that neither acted primarily in self-defense.
The Core Rule: Alleging abuse in your response (Form DV-120) is not enough. To put your own claim of abuse before the court and become eligible for protection, you generally must file your own affirmative request for a restraining order (Form DV-100). That single procedural fact changes the case completely.
Only Responding Versus Filing Your Own DVRO
- When you only respond: The case has one question: Did you abuse the petitioner? You are entirely on the defensive. Testimony about what the petitioner did to you can look like deflection rather than proof of a claim, and it is arguably irrelevant because you aren't asking for an order.
- When you file your own DVRO: The question becomes: Who abused whom, and who was the primary aggressor? Your evidence of the petitioner's abuse is no longer a side issue—it is the affirmative case for your order, directly relevant, fully admissible, and squarely before the judge.
Strategic Comparison: Responding vs. Filing Your Own DVRO
| Consideration | If You Only Respond (DV-120) | If You Also File Your Own DVRO (DV-100) |
|---|---|---|
| The Question Before The Court | Did you abuse the petitioner? | Who abused whom? Who was the primary aggressor? |
| Your Posture | Purely defensive | Defending and affirmatively seeking protection |
| Your Evidence Of Their Abuse | Can appear as deflection; arguably irrelevant | Directly relevant as your affirmative case; fully in play |
| Eligibility For An Order In Your Favor | None; a response cannot yield you an order | You become eligible for a restraining order and its protections |
| Range Of Outcomes | You win or you lose | Both denied, both granted, or either one granted (more paths away from a one-sided loss) |
| Custody Posture Under § 3044 | If their order issues, the presumption runs against you alone | A mutual finding or denial neutralizes/changes the § 3044 posture |
| The Narrative | The petitioner's story of your abuse | Two stories, with the court deciding who the real aggressor was |
The Strategic Logic: Why Filing Is Usually Rational
When you have a genuine claim, filing your own DVRO improves your position across nearly every axis:
- It Unlocks Your Evidence Of Abuse
Your abuse claim is only truly in play under Section 6305 if you file your own request, converting your account from background noise into an affirmative case.
- It Widens The Range Of Outcomes In Your Favor
Only defending offers two results: their order issues, or it does not. Filing opens multiple possibilities: both requests denied, both granted, or yours granted and theirs denied. Converting a probable one-sided loss into a chance at a mutual outcome or a full reversal is a major improvement.
- It Changes The Story The Court Is Deciding
Instead of answering whether you abused the petitioner, the court must expand its scope to determine who the dominant aggressor was between two parties.
- It Protects Your Position On Custody
If the petitioner obtains a DVRO, the Family Code section 3044 presumption against custody runs against you alone. A mutual finding or a denial of their order changes that
The Prisoner's Dilemma: Expect The Other Side To File Too
Because filing is usually rational for a genuinely abused respondent, it is usually rational for a genuinely abused petitioner as well.
- If you file first: Prepare from the beginning for the likelihood that the respondent will file back if they have a plausible claim. The hearing will likely become a contest over who the primary aggressor was rather than a one-sided presentation.
- If you are served first: Merely defending leaves most strategic advantages on the table. When facts support it, filing your own DVRO is very often the stronger response.
How The Court Decides A Mutual DVRO Case: Primary Aggressor & Self-Defense
California Family Code Section 6305 prevents courts from simply "splitting the difference." Before issuing a mutual order, the court must make detailed written findings on two fronts:
- Dominant Aggressor Analysis: The court evaluates factors from Penal Code section 836(c)(3) to identify who was the controlling, threatening force in the relationship rather than who called police first or had a visible injury [INTERNAL LINK: preventing domestic violence charges.].
- Self-Defense Evaluation: Section 6305 recognizes that a person who uses reasonable force to defend themselves is not a primary aggressor. A genuine victim who fought back is not converted into an abuser.
Appellate courts routinely reverse mutual orders that lack these detailed findings, ensuring that mutual orders are not wrongly entered against real victims.
The Ethical Line: File Only If You Were Abused
The strategy of filing your own DVRO is powerful because it puts the full truth before the court. It is not a tactic for manufacturing a claim to gain leverage, and fabricating allegations is unethical.
However, abuse under California family law is broader than many realize. It extends beyond physical violence to include:
- Disturbing the peace: Conduct that destroys your mental or emotional calm.
- Coercive control: Patterns of behavior that limit autonomy.
Many served respondents were genuinely abused under these legal definitions without aligns with these definitions, your claim is real and worth filing.
Case Spotlight: A Past Mutual DVRO Case At Vijay Law
A husband filed a DVRO first, obtained a temporary order, and secured full custody of the couple's infant child. The distraught mother came to us completely separated from her baby.
As she described the facts, it was clear she was the real victim. Instead of merely defending, we filed her own DVRO with a detailed declaration alleging physical abuse, child
- The Turnaround: The child-neglect allegations prompted the judge to order an in a recommendation for interim 50/50 custody and counseling for the father— returning equal custody to the mother within three weeks.
- The Trial: We went to trial and won. The full record established who the real aggressor was.
Had she only defended, her evidence of his abuse and child danger would have carried far less weight. Filing her own request reframed the case around the true story.
Frequently Asked Questions About Mutual DVROs
What Is A Mutual DVRO?
It is a restraining order issued against both parties at once. A California court can issue one only if both parties filed written requests and the court makes detailed findings that both were primary aggressors and neither acted primarily in self-defense.
Can I Just Allege Abuse In My Response Instead Of Filing My Own DVRO?
No. Under Family Code section 6305, abuse alleged only in a responsive pleading does not satisfy the statutory requirement. You must file your own affirmative request on Judicial Council forms.
Should I File My Own DVRO If One Was Filed Against Me?
If you were genuinely abused, filing your own request is often the stronger response because it makes your evidence directly relevant, widens favorable outcomes, and reframes the case around who the primary aggressor was.
Will The Judge Just Grant Both Orders To Be Safe?
No. The law explicitly forbids it without detailed written findings on primary aggression and self-defense. Appellate courts regularly overturn mutual orders lacking these findings.
Does Fighting Back Make Me A Primary Aggressor?
Not if it was reasonable self-defense. Section 6305 protects individuals acting in self- defense from being classified as primary aggressors.
This article provides general information and is not legal advice. Every case turns on its own facts.