Can an adult child obtain a protective order against a parent under Utah law? Martin v. Colonna Explained

In Martin v. Colonna, the Utah Court of Appeals addressed whether an adult child can obtain a protective order against a parent and what circumstances justify such relief under Utah’s Cohabitant Abuse Act.

Background and Facts

Tamra Martin sought a protective order against her father, Anthony Colonna, following a phone call in which she alleged he threatened her. Martin lived with her father until her parents divorced when she was ten, after which she lived with her mother. The parties had minimal contact for years until August 2007, when Martin’s father called her mother’s house about a missing movie rental card. Martin answered the phone, and her father became angry during the conversation, unaware that Martin was living at her mother’s house.

Key Legal Issues

The court addressed two critical questions: whether an adult child qualifies as a cohabitant under Utah Code § 78B-7-102(2)(c), and whether inadvertent contact precludes a finding of substantial likelihood of abuse under the protective order statute.

Court’s Analysis and Holding

The Court of Appeals held that Martin qualified as a cohabitant because she was an adult related by blood to her father. The statute defines cohabitant as including persons “16 years or older who… is related by blood… to the other party,” while excluding only relationships between natural parents and minor children. The district court had erroneously concluded that Martin and her father were never cohabitants after she reached majority.

Regarding the substantial likelihood standard, the court rejected the district court’s reasoning that inadvertent contact automatically precludes a protective order. The proper inquiry is whether the father intentionally threatened Martin during the call, regardless of whether the contact itself was inadvertent, and whether this created reasonable fear of imminent physical harm.

Practice Implications

This decision clarifies that the Cohabitant Abuse Act extends protection to adult children seeking relief from abusive parents. Practitioners should focus on whether threatening behavior occurred and created reasonable fear, rather than the circumstances leading to the contact. The court emphasized that past abuse during minority, while insufficient alone for relief, may contribute to the reasonableness of an adult child’s fear of future harm.