Clarification

Tuesday, March 5, 2019

Page 3

Los Angeles attorney Michael M. Molinaro has taken exception to statements appearing in a Feb. 28 news story on a Court of Appeal opinion reversing that portion of a domestic violence restraining order that bars him from alluding to his divorce case in any posting on Facebook.

The article says that Court of Appeal Justice Anne H. Egerton of this district’s Div. Three “recited abusive conduct by the lawyer, including using his car, in separate incidents, to block the front door of the family residence, to prevent his wife from exiting the carport, and to prevent a truck from removing his wife’s personal property.”

It adds:

“She also told of his threatening to kill the family dogs and becoming so ‘belligerent’ during a quarrel with his wife that police had to restrain him.”

The article should have said that Egerton recited testimony as to abusive conduct and told of testimony as to his threat and his belligerence.

Molinaro insists that, in fact, he did not threaten to harm the dogs, was not belligerent with police, and did not block the vehicle of his wife Bertha Molinaro, and demands:

“Retract your comments regarding the dogs and the police and preventing my wife from exiting the carport as soon as possible.”

The allegations he disputes are not allegations by this newspaper, which merely reported them.

Egerton, in summing up evidence relied upon by the trial court in issue the restraining order, wrote:

“Bertha’s sworn declaration and testimony established that Michael detained Bertha against her will by using his car to block her moving truck from leaving the home; he was belligerent during the confrontation ‘and had to be restrained’ by police officers who responded to the scene; on another occasion he ‘blocked the front entrance of the family residence so no one could go out the front door’; on still another occasion he ‘blocked [Bertha’s] car in the carport so [she] could not leave the house’; he threatened to ‘throw a chair through the bedroom window’ when Bertha refused to remove locks from her bedroom door; and he ‘showed up uninvited to the house’ she had moved to, despite Bertha’s efforts to keep the address confidential. Bertha testified that Michael’s conduct was ‘unsettling’ and ‘very stressful,’ and that she was ‘afraid of what [he] might do in retaliation for [her] moving out.’ She said she had ‘lost 20 pounds since the whole thing started.’ This evidence was plainly sufficient to support a finding that Michael’s conduct ‘destroy[ed] the mental or emotional calm of his [estranged] wife.’…Notwithstanding Michael’s objection to the restriction against posting on Facebook, substantial evidence supports the trial court’s abuse finding.”

The MetNews has no knowledge as to the accuracy of these allegations; it does not represent to them to be true. It merely reports that testimony as to these matters has been declared by the Court of Appeal to constitute substantial evidence in support of a domestic violence restraining order against Molinaro.