Page 3
Wife’s Abusive Verbal Conduct Toward Woman Husband Had Affair With Not Protected—C.A.
Justices Uphold Civil Harassment Restraining Order
By a MetNews Staff Writer
The Court of Appeal for this district has rejected the contention of a wife that she had a First Amendment prerogative to express her indignation to a younger woman with whom, she had learned, her husband had engaged in an affair three years earlier and that, even if her language was crude, a civil harassment restraining order was improperly imposed on her.
Justice Helen I. Bendix of Div. One authored the unpublished opinion, filed Tuesday, affirming a July 3, 2024, order by Los Angeles Superior Court Commissioner Valerie Skeba against Liliana Romo, then 46.
Allison Marcy French, then 35, sought protection on June 11, 2024, asking that Romo stay away from her, her children, and her mother, all of whom lived with her, and seeking an order “for my name not to be slandered to individuals at my place or employment or coworkers of my own any place else.” She told in her application of vile text messages from Roma and of an incident where the responding party shouted profanities at her, in the presence of her children.
French identified Romo as “wife of Albert Romo; man I had affair with in 2021.”
Skeba granted a three-year no-contact restraining order but did not bar slanderous utterances.
Private Matters
Baltodano said that the “First Amendment permits courts to impose civil sanctions” in connection with speech between individuals that relate solely to private matters.
He wrote: “Romo’s assertion that the restraining order prevents her from ‘seek[ing] redress regarding her marital relationship’ is baseless. Romo did not need to communicate with French to persuade French to end the extramarital affair with Romo’s husband, given that there was no dispute the affair ended years before the July 3, 2024 hearing on French’s request for the restraining order. Specifically, in the request for the restraining order, French stated she ‘had [an] affair with [Romo’s husband] in 2021’ (italics added), and Romo admits in her opening brief that her husband ‘had engaged in an eight-month extramarital affair with his coworker,...French, in 2021’ (italics added).”
Spousal Communications
The jurist continued:
“Furthermore, the restraining order does not bar Romo from communicating with her husband. Given these circumstances, we reject Romo’s assertion that the restraining order bars her from repairing her marriage.”
Baltodano’s opinion rejects Romo’s contention that her conduct involved no overt threats and finds no merit in other points she raised.
The case is French v. Romo, B340597.
Representing Romo were Century City attorney Christopher Chaney; Encino practitioner Dawn M. Dunbar and Lindsey N. Chaney, of her office; and Ventura lawyer Evan B. Frank. French did not file a respondent’s brief.
Copyright 2025, Metropolitan News Company