Why a judge’s matrimonial rulings are so confusing

The courts have become a battleground over a federal law known as the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office Civil Rights Act.

The measure requires that any person who receives a domestic violence restraining order against him or her report it within 30 days to the sheriff.

The sheriff then can file a civil lawsuit if the order is filed more than two years after the restraining order is issued.

The statute has been called the “matrimonial rape shield.”

But lawyers for both sides of the debate say the law is vague, and that there are many cases where a judge can’t even order a person to report their restraining order to law enforcement.

One of the attorneys is Marcia Hamer, a partner at the law firm of Covington & Burling.

“It’s been a very challenging process to say, ‘Well, we know what you’re talking about, we can’t enforce it.

You have to report it,'” Hamer said.

She’s currently representing a man named Chris who says he was beaten and beaten on his girlfriend’s floor by her ex-husband.

The Arizona Republic has obtained court documents showing that after a year of trying to reach a resolution, Hamer received a ruling from a judge that said Chris could not file a restraining order because his ex-wife’s ex-boyfriend was still living with him.

The order was based on a false claim by Chris that the ex-spouse had beaten and abused him.

After the filing of the restraining notice, Hams office reached a confidential settlement with Chris’s ex.

However, he’s still waiting to see the result of the judge’s ruling.

Chris and his ex are now trying to get a divorce from their former partner.

Hamer says she has a lot of clients who were harassed by their ex-partners, and she’s not sure if it’s a good idea to have a restraining notice on a person who is not the victim of domestic violence.

“If the person is not at the mercy of this abusive person, I think that’s a dangerous situation,” she said.

“What’s really important is to make sure the people who have this restraining order have the ability to report that they have been victimized by their abuser.”

Maricolla County Sheriff Joe Arpaio, who signed the legislation, has repeatedly told reporters that the law will protect women.

However his office has been accused of overstepping its authority, using the restraining orders to harass and prosecute people, including some who had already filed for divorce.

Arpaio’s office said it is only targeting “domestic violence abusers,” and has not been accused by any of the women in the Mariposa case of using it against them.

Arpaio said he did not believe that the restraining rules were designed to protect women, but he said they were necessary to protect the public from “violent predators.”

The sheriff has said he will not be enforcing the law against people who do not have restraining orders against them, although some of the cases in which he has used the restraining laws have resulted in people being charged with felony crimes.

The Maricollas most recent domestic violence lawsuit was filed in November 2015.

Maricolls current case is pending in federal court in Tucson.