the trial was on November 21, 2014 for protective orders and injunction in front of a Judicial District Court
Judge. The presiding judge was retiring in December of 2014. The judge ordered the opposing clients lawyer to prepare the Judgment, send it to our lawyer, then get it to him (judge) no later than December 11, 2014 due to him retiring. He also stated that if the lawyers had a problem with the wording to call him (judge) and they would work it out.
The judgment was never prepared by the opposing clients lawyer and our lawyer tried contacting him numerous times but was unsuccessful. Our attorney did nothing about this until a family member was attacked by one of the opposing clients in December 2015. Our lawyer prepared the judgment, including the written transcript from the court reporter from the trial dated November 21, 2014. It was filed on December 23, 2015 and signed by the present judge on December 29, 2015, who at the time he signed the judgment, was in agreement with the previous judge's decision. Because of our lawyer not acting on this matter sooner, we felt the need to get a new lawyer.
We went to court on June 24, 2016 for contempt and the present judge didn't agree with the previous judge's order to (restrict one co-owner and not the other in reference to us living on co-owned property and not the opposing clients, who wanted to live on the same property, a pool house (cabana) in the same yard as us, and had moved in the same day our family member was attacked. Because that judgment was not prepared by the opposing client,s lawyer that was supposed to prepare it in a timely manner filed, and signed by the judge presiding while he was still in office, would there be an exception or would it be lawful for the present judge to contact him (previous judge) due to the opposing client's lawyer failing to carry out the judge's order.
The previous judge made that decision, because of the previous incidents that continuously occurred. In the written transcripts he states that if they (opposing clients) went their, they would certainly be doing that with the expectation of a confrontation, which would specifically be against the injunction.
They would have access to all other co-owned property except where we reside.
The present judge stated that he didn't have any knowledge of our case when he took office, and did not understand legally, why the judge made that desicion, so he felt the need to amend the judgment in their favor, allowing them to live in the co-owned property in the same yard.