Civil Harassment Restraining Order Dissolved After 5-Day Trial; 40+ Firearms Released

When our client — a lawful, responsible firearm owner we’ll refer to here as R.K. — was served with a civil harassment restraining order, the court’s temporary order did something that takes most people by surprise: it required him to surrender more than 40 firearms within 24 hours, before a single witness had testified and before any judge had decided whether the allegations against him were true.

That is the quiet trap inside California’s restraining order system. A temporary order, granted on one side’s paperwork, can strip a lawful owner of an entire firearm collection on nothing more than an accusation. For R.K., the stakes were not abstract. His firearms, his Second Amendment rights, his reputation, and his exposure to criminal liability for any misstep during the relinquishment process were all on the line at once.

After a five-day evidentiary trial in Orange County, the court ruled for our client. The petition was denied in its entirety. The temporary restraining order was dissolved. Our client was the prevailing party. With the order gone, the legal basis that had required him to give up his firearms came to an end.

This is how that result was reached — and what it means if you are a gun owner facing the same situation.

Served with a restraining order that threatens your firearm rights? Call (888) 808-2179. The temporary order is already in effect, and the clock on your response is already running.

The verified result

Court: Superior Court of California, County of Orange — Central Justice Center Department: C64 Matter type: Civil Harassment Restraining Order (Code of Civil Procedure § 527.6) Our role: Counsel for the Respondent (our client, “R.K.”) Lead trial counsel: Matthew Barhoma, Barhoma Law, P.C. d/b/a The Restraining Order Law Firm Trial: Five-day evidentiary bench trial; proceedings spanned May 7, 2026 to May 27, 2026, including witness and party testimony, cross-examination, closing arguments, and rebuttal Ruling (May 27, 2026): “Restraining order as requested is denied in its entirety.” The court ordered the Temporary Restraining Order dissolved. Our client was the prevailing party. [Docket number on file and available to verify on request. Public case number: 30-2026-01539881-CU-HR-CJC — confirm whether to publish the number before going live. — internal note]

Every case is different. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. See the disclaimer below.

What is a civil harassment restraining order — and why is the firearm consequence so severe?

A civil harassment restraining order (CHRO) is a civil court order issued under California Code of Civil Procedure § 527.6. It is the order used between people who are not in a close domestic relationship — neighbors, coworkers, acquaintances, extended family, former friends, business associates, and strangers. To obtain a lasting order after a hearing, the petitioner must prove, by clear and convincing evidence, that the respondent committed unlawful violence, made a credible threat of violence, or engaged in a knowing and willful course of conduct that served no legitimate purpose and caused a reasonable person — and the petitioner specifically — substantial emotional distress.

That “clear and convincing” standard matters enormously. It is a higher burden than the “preponderance of the evidence” standard used in domestic violence restraining order cases. Holding a petitioner to that higher bar — element by element — is frequently where a civil harassment case is won or lost.

Here is the part that catches lawful gun owners off guard. A person subject to a civil harassment restraining order — including a temporary one — is treated as a prohibited person and must relinquish their firearms. Under Code of Civil Procedure § 527.9, the court orders the restrained person to surrender every firearm in their possession or control within 24 hours of being served, either to law enforcement or to a licensed dealer, and to file a receipt with the court within 48 hours. Possessing or buying a firearm while subject to the order is itself a crime under Penal Code § 29825.

Read that again: the relinquishment happens on the temporary order — before trial, before cross-examination, before any judge has weighed the evidence. For R.K., that meant turning over more than 40 firearms on the strength of allegations that had not yet been tested in any courtroom.

Can a restraining order take your guns in California before the hearing?

Yes. A temporary restraining order issued under Code of Civil Procedure § 527.6 triggers the firearm-relinquishment requirement of § 527.9. The restrained person must surrender all firearms within 24 hours of service and file proof with the court within 48 hours — regardless of whether the underlying allegations are ultimately proven. The firearms are held by law enforcement (or a licensed dealer) while the order is in effect. If the order is later dissolved or denied, the prohibition tied to that order ends, and § 527.9 provides for the return of lawfully owned firearms once there is no longer a valid order (and no other disqualifier) in place.

That single mechanic is why a civil harassment case involving firearms is not just a restraining order case. It is simultaneously a firearms case — and it has to be handled by someone who understands both.

Why specialized firearms knowledge decided this case

Most restraining order practitioners are not firearms lawyers. Most firearms lawyers do not litigate restraining orders. R.K.’s defense lived precisely in the overlap — and that overlap is the strategic core of how this firm is built.

The Restraining Order Law Firm is the protective-order practice of attorney Matthew Barhoma, whose affiliated firm, Power Trial Lawyers, is a Southern California criminal-defense practice with a deep, dedicated California firearms-defense body of work. That meant R.K.’s case was handled with command of the issues that a general restraining-order attorney can miss:

• Executing the relinquishment of 40+ firearms without creating new criminal exposure. The relinquishment process under § 527.9 is unforgiving, and the wrong move — a late surrender, a missed receipt, an improper transfer, possession by a now-prohibited person — can convert a civil dispute into a criminal firearms charge under Penal Code § 29825 and related statutes. We have written extensively on these exact offenses: see Power Trial Lawyers’ guides to California gun possession charges, Penal Code § 29800 (felon/prohibited person in possession), and the firm-wide California firearm offenses guide.
• Protecting the firearms themselves. A large, lawfully held collection is property. Custody, condition, identification, and the path to its eventual return all had to be managed correctly through the life of the case — work that draws directly on the firm’s Orange County gun possession experience.
• Framing lawful ownership as exactly that. Lawful collection, sport, and self-defense are legitimate purposes — the opposite of the “no legitimate purpose” element a § 527.6 petitioner must prove. Putting R.K.’s firearm ownership in its correct, lawful context was part of dismantling the petitioner’s narrative, not conceding it.
• Trying the case to the higher standard. Across five days, the firm held the petitioner to the clear and convincing burden through direct testimony, cross-examination, closing argument, and rebuttal — the full evidentiary record the court is required to weigh.

For a deeper treatment of the defense itself, see Power Trial Lawyers’ civil harassment restraining order defense resource.

What happened at the five-day trial

Civil harassment cases are decided by the court, not a jury — a bench trial. But “bench trial” should not be mistaken for “quick.” This one ran across five days of testimony and evidence. The court heard from witnesses and from the parties themselves. Our client’s testimony was presented and tested on cross-examination. Both sides delivered closing arguments, and the court heard rebuttal.

Then the court, “having fully considered the arguments of all parties, both written and oral, as well as the evidence presented,” ruled. The restraining order as requested was denied in its entirety. The temporary restraining order was dissolved. By order of the court, the exhibits were released to counsel for safekeeping pending any post-verdict or appellate proceedings, and our client stood as the prevailing party — a status that, under CCP § 527.6(s), can support a request for court costs and attorney’s fees.

For R.K., the practical meaning was simple and enormous: the order that had branded him a prohibited person and stripped him of more than 40 firearms was gone.

What this means if you are a gun owner served with a restraining order

If you own firearms and you have been served with a civil harassment (or any) restraining order in California, three things are true at once, and all of them are urgent:

1. You must obey the temporary order completely — including the firearm-surrender terms — on time. As unfair as it may feel to relinquish firearms over an unproven allegation, violating the order or mishandling the surrender is a crime and is the fastest way to lose both the case and your liberty. Comply, on the clock, correctly, and keep every receipt.
2. The temporary order is not the final word. A temporary order is granted on one side’s paperwork. The hearing — which can become a multi-day evidentiary trial like R.K.’s — is where the petitioner finally has to prove the case to the higher clear-and-convincing standard, and where a prepared respondent can win.
3. The firearm dimension changes who should represent you. This is not a generic restraining order. It is a restraining order and a firearms matter, and the relinquishment process carries its own criminal tripwires. You want counsel who handles both.

Learn more about defending these cases on our How to Fight a Restraining Order hub, our Civil Harassment Restraining Order practice page, our guide for people who were just served at I Was Served, and our overview of restraining orders and firearms. If the allegations against you are false or exaggerated, start with False Allegations.

Talk to the firm that tried this case

We handle civil harassment and all California restraining orders for respondents and petitioners across Orange County and Southern California, including matters at the Central Justice Center in Santa Ana and throughout Orange County. When firearms are on the line, you want a team that litigates the restraining order and understands California gun law down to the statute.

Call (888) 808-2179 for a confidential consultation, or request one online. Hearing dates and firearm-surrender deadlines do not wait — and neither should you.

→ See more outcomes on our Results page. → Meet our attorneys.

Author / firm — E-E-A-T

Reviewed and authored by Matthew Barhoma, founder of Power Trial Lawyers and the attorney behind The Restraining Order Law Firm (a d/b/a of Barhoma Law, P.C.). Mr. Barhoma was lead trial counsel of record in the matter described above and personally tried the five-day case in the Orange County Superior Court. His practice concentrates on high-stakes protective-order litigation and California firearms defense for both respondents and petitioners. [CONFIRM before publish, use only verifiable credentials: California Bar No. ____; admitted ____; trial/appellate highlights; recognitions.]

Office: 835 Wilshire Blvd., Floor 5, Los Angeles, CA 90017 · (888) 808-2179 · Serving Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino, San Diego, and Ventura counties.

Frequently Asked Questions