The Glamorous Grind
The Glamorous Grind is where bold legal minds meet unfiltered conversations. Join hosts Ilona Antonyan and Mila Arutunian—powerhouse attorneys at Antonyan Miranda—for this dynamic podcast as they dive into headline-making lawsuits, past cases, and the hustle of balancing career, family, and ambition. With fascinating guests, including celebrities, business leaders, and former clients, Ilona and Mila keep it raw, real, and always glamorous.
The Glamorous Grind
Sexual Harassment & Restraining Orders: The Legal Truth You Need to Hear
Sexual harassment. Wrongful termination. Domestic violence. Restraining orders.
In this season finale of The Glamorous Grind, attorneys Mila and Ilona get real about some of the most misunderstood legal issues people face today—both at work and at home.
They break down what actually qualifies as harassment, how to protect yourself if you’re fired for reporting abuse or having a medical condition, and how restraining orders can be used to protect victims—or manipulate custody and court outcomes.
Whether you're an employee, a parent, or a survivor navigating a toxic relationship, this episode gives you real tools, legal insight, and confidence to stand up for yourself.
🔑 Topics include:
- How to document abuse and report it safely
- The truth about retaliation and whistleblower laws
- The legal and emotional cost of restraining orders
- Disability rights in the workplace
- What judges really look at in family court
- How to defend yourself from false allegations
💬 “You have a duty to protect yourself—and your children. We’re here to tell you how.”
If you found this helpful, please share it with someone who might need it. We're just a DM away if you have questions.
Want more glamor during your grind? New episodes every Tuesday. Make sure you are subscribed on YouTube and wherever you get your podcasts.
Download the full podcast here:
Follow @glamorousgrindpodcast on Social Media:
https://www.instagram.com/glamorousgrindpodcast/
https://www.tiktok.com/@glamorousgrindpodcast
Welcome to the Glamorous Grind where grit meets glamour and the law is always in style. I'm Alona Antonian, a certified family law specialist and a trial attorney, and I'm Mila.
Mila:Aratunian, a trial attorney who specializes in employment and personal injury law. We are lawyers, friends and your guides to real-life legal drama.
Ilona:Each week, we're breaking down unforgettable cases, sharing incredible personal journeys and sharing what keeps us motivated, both in our careers and personal lives.
Mila:So, whether you're hustling to make your own dreams happen or just here for a good story, settle in with your favorite drink, because we are bringing you wisdom, wit and a whole lot of style. It's law, it's life, it's the Glamorous Grind.
Ilona:This episode is about power and how the law can either protect it or be used to abuse it.
Mila:We are talking about domestic violence, restraining orders and workplace sexual harassment, areas where fear, silence and legal confusion often keep people stuck.
Ilona:I'll be talking about the legal and strategic realities of domestic violence restraining orders, why some victims hesitate to file, how these orders can affect divorce and custody, and what to do if you're hit with a frivolous restraining order meant to gain advantage and leverage in court and I will be unpacking what actually counts as sexual harassment how the law defines it versus how it shows up in real life, and what people need to know to recognize it and to respond.
Ilona:We'll break down how these issues show up in real life and in court, what victims need to know and how the system can be both a shield and a weapon.
Mila:If you've ever questioned what's fair, what's legal or how to fight back. This conversation is for you, camila.
Ilona:you practice employment law. I'm an expert in family law. There have been more domestic violence restraining orders filed in the last few years, especially since COVID, than before. What about you from employment law perspective? What do you see more of terms of litigation and or types of cases that are coming up, and what's your perspective?
Mila:From an employment law perspective and I really enjoy the sexual harassment cases in the employment law context. But a lot of that kind of falls also into, you know, sexual assault. So all of that is kind of intertwined and having to do with women's rights and I think all around women are just feeling more comfortable standing up for themselves. I think part of that is society is making it okay. I think part of it is also just knowledge, like the more you know, everyone hates on social media and there are certainly negative aspects to it, but at the same time I think a lot of people and women are being more informed as to their rights and things that they can do.
Ilona:What about in California? It can sometimes be exaggerated, Like you wink at somebody at work and there goes a lawsuit. You know, hey, that's sexual harassment.
Mila:There are lawsuits that are exaggerated, for sure. I think when I was on the defense side defending employers, there was a lawsuit where a woman was claiming that someone harassed her by looking at her. That's crazy. Literally he was sitting at a desk and looking at her and the jury found liability there. Really, yeah, and they found that it was harassing.
Mila:The rights of employees are very extensive, which is why most of these cases settle, which is why most employment cases never go to trial. Oftentimes a lawsuit isn't even filed. They would rather just settle it out than pay their attorney $600 an hour to defend it. And then also, a lot of employers don't have insurance In a personal injury case most car accident cases there's insurance at play, so the person isn't going to be personally liable for the accident. But employers have to buy a specialty insurance. It's called EPLI insurance. It's very expensive and there's an extremely high deductible. Usually a lot of companies, especially if they're not huge, they won't even purchase this insurance. But just to break it down, you bring a case for 20 causes of action and you go to trial and a jury finds the employer is not liable on anything except for one. Let's say like complete BS claims. But there's like one thing, one thing that the jury finds liability for the plaintiff's attorney, even if the jury verdict is $5, the plaintiff's attorney could get all of their fees.
Ilona:I don't agree with that. As a business person, I don't think that's fair. That kills the economy. That puts people out of business. I don't think that's fair. That kills the economy, that puts people out of business. I don't think that's good. It's not fair. How are you going to want to run a business when you can face that liability? Yesterday I was at a business meeting and one of my colleagues mentioned that they were recently hit with what's called a PACA PAGA, PAGA lawsuit, which I'd never heard of before. I'm like what is it?
Mila:So PAGA is basically the state version of class actions, like the California-specific state version of class actions. How I see PAGA is. The only entity winning in a PAGA lawsuit is the attorney.
Ilona:The government.
Mila:Well, the government's getting it, yes, but the government doesn't care for that money. But the plaintiff, who? What do you? Who?
Ilona:they don't care about the money I mean they care about the money.
Mila:But I'm saying that the plaintiff who's bringing the claim isn't winning anything. They get a tiny amount. The attorneys have an incentive to work these cases up because they'll get their fee regardless. So they get a you know a couple million dollars in settlement and most of that money will go to the attorney.
Ilona:I think that there are many lawyers that may take losses that could be BS, because the business owners may be more tempted to settle rather than litigate. I don't think that's fair. I don't think that's good for the state, I don't think that's ethical from the attorney perspective and from the employee perspective. But everybody tries to make a quick buck and not give a shit about someone else Coming on to the plaintiff side, from the defense side.
Mila:I was very hesitant to become a plaintiff's attorney honestly because of that, Because I have my ethical code and I don't want to take BS cases, which is why I didn't go and be a solo practitioner, because then I wouldn't have a choice but to take BS cases, because I would need the money and these cases almost always settle. But that's why I went to work for a firm and one of the first things I told the first firm I worked at and one of the first things I told you when I came to work with you is my integrity is number one.
Ilona:I'm not taking bullshit cases to work with you is my integrity is number one. I'm not taking bullshit cases and I love that when you said that. Hey, I have a strong moral code here and I'm not going to take on bullshit claims just to make quick money. I'm comfortable with having an employment law department because of that. I think there's certainly many victims and bad employers and things that employees report that go unnoticed and people get harassed and terminated for bad reasons and there should be justice for those people. But I know many business owners who have faced bullshit lawsuits brought by sole practitioners and others who think they're going to be able to squeeze money out of a business, and I think those businesses need to stand up for themselves and fight back as a plaintiff's attorney and running the team.
Mila:I fired a lot of clients, even when money is offered. I have fired clients because I find out they are lying and I don't want to do that to the company. And that's just me and my personal beliefs. I believe in karma and I don't really want it to come back and bite me. At the same time, I have to say I also still love what I do and fighting for people who were wrongfully terminated. I mean I had a lady come to me and she found out she had cancer and three weeks later they fired her and she called me and she didn't even want to stand up for herself. I was like are you insane? She had three kids. I literally called a other attorney on the other side when they got counsel and I was like are you guys serious? And then they tried to offer her her job back. They were like oh, we'll take her back. I'm like are you, are you?
Ilona:insane. What is wrong with you? In a short period I've been with my firm since january to present I've noticed you made a big difference for many clients you've represented in employment law and the cases you have taken. It's real facts. It's real injuries, emotional and or physical, when it comes to sexual abuse or other employment law harassment, and I've been very proud of you. Not only have you been able to resolve it very quickly, but for a good sum of money for those victims. But all of those cases had merit. They're not bullshit cases. So with that, what sort of cases do you love?
Mila:taking. Yeah, I mean, my favorite cases really are sexual harassment and any like disability discrimination. I really take close to heart too, because under California law the employer, once they find out the employee has any type of disability or issue, they have an affirmative duty to come in and say hey, we know you have this issue. How can we accommodate you? Can we turn off the lights? Can we let you work from home once a week? And a lot of times employers don't do that. They just say, hey, you're screwing up, you're fired. And without even trying to see if there's a way to accommodate them or help them but how do you?
Ilona:differentiate. A bullshit excuse Because anybody can say, oh, I'm stressed out. I mean, who is not stressed out? Everybody has some sort of stress in their life. Can you require real proof?
Mila:You should require real proof before. You don't have to accommodate anything that a doctor doesn't recommend. If I see gray areas in a case, I'm not going to be like, no, let's litigate it, let's take it to the grave. I'm like, okay, talk to my client. I'm like, hey, here are the gray areas in your case, let me see what I can get you, what makes sense. And I feel like, in a way, I'm a mediator, because part of my job is to manage my client's expectations, make sure they understand what litigation entails and also understand and fight for my client with respect to the person. And a lot of times people come to me at one of some of the hardest times of their lives, where they lose their jobs. Sometimes they're longstanding employees and I have to walk them through it. I have to make sure they're not making decisions based on emotions. I have to make sure they understand the trauma that comes with litigation, because once you file a lawsuit, they can take the client's deposition, which re-traumatizes them in a lot of cases.
Ilona:They're medical records because if you're claiming emotional distress or any sort of other, you know your psychiatrist records will be at issue.
Mila:And they can hire their own doctor to come in and do an independent medical examination of the plaintiff. And those doctors are ruthless because their job is to come in and be like no, this person may be depressed, but their depression is actually caused by X Y Z.
Ilona:And if someone has been in therapy and you get you, if you get sued as a business, you can get their discovery, even though it may be subject to protective order, that will only that means, will only be used in this litigation and only be seen by attorneys and or the judge and potentially the jury.
Mila:As life happens, that's going to be a good defense, like, hey, your emotional distress didn't arise just because somebody compliment you know, whatever happened at work, it was because of all this other stuff you had going on and I get that a lot, especially if you know if you're in therapy you're going to talk about all of your traumas, if you were molested as a child, if you were abused by your parents, if you have a bad relationship with your sister. They get all of that and then their doctor reviews all of the records, comes in and aggressively attacks the patient to put in a report that, oh, all of their PTSD is actually caused by their childhood traumas of abuse.
Ilona:But realistically, if you have so much stuff in your medical records, a long history of problems and all these issues that you've been going to therapy with, could be depression because of breakup with a boyfriend, girlfriend.
Mila:Well, what happens a lot of times and I actually have a client right now that this is going on with when they may have suffered some issues as a child or you know, in their lives, and then they were fine. And then they were fine and they were functional and they were a great employee and doing great, until something happened in the workplace that caused them to fall apart.
Ilona:How severe is that? Something to trigger certain events from the past?
Mila:Every person is different, right? I mean you have the same kind of law in personal injury If you get into a car accident with someone the HL plaintiff rule. If you get into a car accident with someone and you know they had a pre-existing injury that had since healed, but now it's exacerbated, you could be liable for that injury.
Ilona:To give an example of actual plaintiff is for those who don't understand. When I had a jury trial once on that issue, I had an ex-shel plaintiff. So I brought an egg to my opening argument or it was closing argument, I'm not sure which one and I dropped it to show the jury what an ex-shel plaintiff is relative to a hard ball that obviously doesn't break if you drop it. So it's someone who has prior injuries, whether it's psychological or physical injuries, that is more susceptible to greater injury because of the past existing problems.
Mila:It's really sad when that happens. I mean, unfortunately, a workplace does need to be strictly professional, and I know that back in the day it was completely different, but nowadays I mean I have to say it people are different. Nowadays, people are more sensitive, people are more triggered, and I think all employers have to be cognizant of that and train their supervisors properly so that anytime there's any issues, they are addressed, because that's really all that matters, right? Employers can't ensure everything is perfect, and I always trained this when I was on the defense side. You cannot control everything to make sure everything is perfect. So what can you do? What can you control when something happens? When something comes up, you make sure that it's addressed. You do an investigation. If the employer does that, they're not going to really have a lawsuit. Here's what happens. If there's an instance where there's a harassing instance or some type of sexual harassment, if a supervisor witnesses it, the employer is liable for the supervisor witnessing it, because there's vicarious liability.
Ilona:The supervisor's knowledge means the employer is automatically aware there are problems where the supervisor may not report it up the chain, where they're supposed to for the employer to take action. They just think, okay, it's not going to happen again, or I'll resolve it myself, or the supervisor just tries to like, talk to them, like, oh, I'll just talk to them.
Mila:That's not enough. And the supervisor has a duty to report to HR or to an executive in the company. And then the employer has a duty to investigate it. And that could mean sitting down the people and documenting it, asking them what happened and doing a write-up for the person who screwed up and being like, hey, you can't do this, you do this again, you're gone. That is enough to make it a very strong defense for the employer. But the problem is those rules aren't often followed.
Ilona:Yeah, and for employers, it's a good idea to get either a payroll service or an HR service who will do that investigation for you if you're not equipped and if you don't have an HR department. For example, like ADP, totalsource, they have an HR person that comes with your subscription, so if there's an issue, you just report it to them. They'll investigate and document it and protect you. Or there are other services as well, like paychecks.
Mila:Yeah, and there are now outside HR consulting companies. In fact, june, june, ann, who was here a couple weeks ago, he was, he works for one. There are outside HR consulting companies that that's all they do is come into companies and do HR consulting, whether it's consulting on your payroll stuff or consulting on investigation.
Ilona:Yeah, so you don't have to have an in-house HR person. You can either do it through your payroll company if they offer that service, or you can subscribe to another HR service that you use or go to for on need basis, that's part of the cost of doing business in California is making sure your personnel issues are in order. Because people don't know what they don't know. If someone was terminated, what do you think is the best way to find out whether they have a claim?
Mila:The first thing we look at because California is an at-will employment state right, so employers can legally terminate anyone for any reason or for no reason at all, as long as they don't have a contract that states the terms of the employment. But if that reason is illegal, obviously there's a claim there. So what is illegal? It has to be either discriminatory, so based on a protected class that person was terminated because they're a woman. That person was terminated because they're African American or because they're Muslim. There has to be a causal connection to the protected class.
Ilona:That would be religion, race, sex, gender.
Mila:There's like 60 different categories in.
Ilona:California. What are the top 10?
Mila:Yeah, it would be race, national, ethnicity, religion, I. The hairstyle is now a protected class. Yeah, anyone with ethnic hair. So you know, employers can't have policies now that prohibit people from having their natural hairstyles. I did have a case one time where a man had, like, a beard that he had to have for his religion and they tried to get him to groom the beard that he had to have for his religion. And they tried to get him to groom the beard but because it was part of his religion during that time of the year to have his beard out, we made claims and they settled the case. Another thing that comes up often is whistleblower If someone makes a protected complaint and they're terminated.
Ilona:What's a protected complaint?
Mila:That's a great question because we learned this the hard way. But a protected complaint has to be a complaint. That's a great question because you know we learned this the hard way. But a protected complaint has to be a complaint of something illegal. So like what Drug use there's? Like drug use in the company and you make a complaint and then later you're terminated, that's whistleblower. If you make a complaint that the CEO is stealing money and then you're terminated, then that's whistleblower. If you make a complaint that someone's being sexually harassed or that you're being sexually harassed, not only do you have the sexual harassment claims, but you have whistleblower claims and you have wrongful termination claims.
Ilona:Is whistleblower claim different than wrongful termination, and how?
Mila:It is. It's a separate claim. So here's the thing that a lot of people kind of confuse is a lot of people call me and they'll be like my. That a lot of people kind of confuse is a lot of people call me and they'll be like my supervisor is mean to me. My supervisor is harassing me, they're creating a hostile work environment for me. That in and of itself may not be illegal and that gets confusing because a workplace doesn't have to be a sorority right, like your supervisor doesn't have to be super nice to you. Obviously, if it's harassing to a point where it's a hostile work environment, putting you down, publicly humiliating you, you could have a hostile work environment claim.
Mila:But by itself it's not that valuable. It has to. It should be accompanied with something else. And if you make a complaint that your supervisor is mean, that may not be protected for retaliation because that in and of itself is not illegal. And we've had cases like that where we've brought them and the attorney on the other side says okay, they made a complaint that the supervisor was mean. The supervisor was mean because they had performance issues and they were not performing. That complaint in and of itself is not a protected complaint because it's not an illegal activity.
Ilona:Can you give us an example of like the juiciest sexual harassment cases you've settled some of the facts and how quickly you were able to resolve them?
Mila:Sexual harassment is a big one when people are treated differently on the job. I see this a lot in law enforcement. Believe it or not, Law enforcement and all public entities seem to have a lot of sexual harassment. I think a lot of those entities have more of a big boys club where the men are in charge and the women are kind of put down and subjected to negative treatment, where there's retaliation and there's sexual harassment and there's comments and no one does anything about it because the you know, the supervisors say oh, that's just how he is, oh, he just grew up in the 60s.
Mila:It's the culture of the places. What's your advice to?
Ilona:those who are getting sexually harassed at work.
Mila:Document everything. I encounter this problem so much, not only in harassment but in disability, discrimination cases, in retaliation cases. People don't want it to get uncomfortable and are afraid to document it, but that is why the laws are made. That is why legislature created the laws. Once things are documented, the employer has a duty to respond. So put it in writing. You can either submit a complaint to human resources if you don't have a human resources department, small company, submit it to your supervisor or to an executive, if you don't feel comfortable to your supervisor. It has to be in writing.
Ilona:I have so many people it's important writing to employer, not just keeping your journal at home and be like, okay, I documented everything. Here's the story I wrote up about all the emotional damage.
Mila:If the employer does not know that this is going on, they have no duty to take action. So I've had cases that came to me and there were all these horrible things going on behind the scenes but no supervisor was ever apprised of it. The employer didn't know. The only way to get liability in that case really is if that other employee who's harassing you has had some type of tendency to harass other employees and the employer didn't do anything to protect you that way. But if the employer doesn't know, they have no duty to protect you, so you're not going to be protected. So a lot of times people will come to me and they're like oh, I didn't, I just didn't feel comfortable reporting it, I just quit instead. Like no.
Mila:Well then, they don't have a claim and then if you, even if you quit, you can still have claims under the law. But you have to show that the work environment was so hostile that no reasonable person could have been expected to sustain in that environment. So in your resignation email you need to put this is like a perfect case is if you're harassed, you make a report, nothing is done to protect you, and then you can resign. And then you can resign. And in your resignation you say you, and then you can resign, and then you can resign. And in your resignation you say on this day I made a report in writing, attached the exhibit A, my email to HR. Nothing was done to protect me. This environment is too hostile, I can no longer sustain in it.
Ilona:Therefore I'm resigning. Is there a law in California as to the reasonable amount of time that the employer should have to investigate your complaint?
Mila:The employer- needs to take action immediately. If they get a complaint, even if it's like a BS complaint, they have to take action immediately. The employee can go to the employer and say I've submitted this complaint, I don't feel comfortable being here, what can I do? They might be able to take time off. They don't have time off. They can go to a doctor, tell them they're distressed. They'll put them off work on disability or they could take their sick time Like there are ways around that.
Ilona:What's the statute of limitations? How long does a person have to bring an employment lawsuit? Three years, used to be two. Three years from what?
Mila:Three years from, basically, the date of the wrongful action. Unfortunately, sometimes you have cases where there's ongoing wrongful or retaliatory action.
Ilona:So it's not from the last act, it's three years from each individual act Basically.
Mila:So like, for example, we had a case where a person had a retaliate or, I'm sorry, sexual harassment claim and they agreed to participate in an investigation because they were sexually harassed and someone else brought this claim. Um, subsequently they were retaliated against for agreeing to participate in that investigation. So are you following? So the sexual harassment happened, then the retaliation happened and then they had to quit and it was a constructive termination. Because it became so hostile they had to quit. But obviously the time passed and then by the time they were ready to bring the lawsuit, it was like two years after the retaliation but more than three years after the initial sexual harassment.
Mila:So there's no sexual harassment we tried to bring them, the judge threw them out. The judge said we can only bring retaliation claims Interesting. The three things that companies can do is create a culture of accountability. Train your people to make sure everyone knows what they're doing, knows their reporting duties and knows how to properly investigate these claims. And the third thing is believe your staff, no matter how insignificant the complaint may seem. Employers have a duty to do a proactive investigation. Believe everything that's being said and, based on the investigation results, act accordingly. You know I've seen some restraining orders. I haven't worked a ton with restraining orders in the domestic violence sphere, but do you see the restraining orders as a weapon or a shield?
Ilona:I see it more as a shield, but there's about 25% of them, I would say, that are used as a weapon to gain leverage and advantage in family court. Because obtaining a restraining order is relatively easy and in my experience you know I've had to defend restraining orders where one writes this story about all these things that happen without putting dates in a declaration, like when certain things happen. They get a restraining order just by going and filing it over the counter at the business office. The other side against whom the restraining order is sought does not get noticed to be able to defend themselves, so it's issued over the counter, it gets served on someone with potentially a move out order. It means they have to stay out of their house and move out immediately until they get their court hearing in about two weeks. They potentially cannot see their children until that court date for about two weeks and there could be other restrictions like no contact, et cetera. Like no contact, et cetera. But the problem is that if someone is lying in that declaration or is being extremely vague or is talking about events that may have happened 20 years ago, where in a case that I dealt with, the wife wrote like yeah, uh, punched the wall. He uh pinched my legs, uh, he did x, y and z and it sounded like this happened recently. Because you get a restraining order because it's to protect you.
Ilona:Now because of events and violence that happened recently and turns out this was when I took her deposition. These people were in their 60s now. This was when I took her deposition. These people were in their 60s Now. This was when they were like married in their 20s, 40 years ago. But the way it was written up and filed with the court I think the attorney in that case was either didn't ask their client or intentionally did this to get get leverage and kick my client out of his own home. They were very general in leaving dates out. Can you get?
Mila:any penalties against someone for lying to get a restraining order.
Ilona:Yes, if you prevail, then Family Code 6344 allows for prevailing party fees.
Ilona:You can also ask for Family Code 271 sanctions for increasing cost of litigation. But that does not erase the damage to your life, the damage to your children, potentially, if you have small children, where someone is kept from seeing them, from visiting them, from being in their own home and having to be out in the street and stay in a hotel or with friends and get by until they get to court. And then what happens is the hearing generally must be held within 21 days or 25 days at the latest if it's for good cause and if the responding party has a right to seek continuance, that has to be granted. If they need more time to prepare but often one maybe gets served shortly before the hearing date and they need an attorney. They show up and they're not ready. So it's already been two weeks.
Ilona:You know that they've been kicked out and they try to see what to do, what this all means, or they may not have funds to hire a lawyer and need more time. So then the restraining order gets continued and they're still kept away, potentially from seeing their kids or being away from their home, not having all their belongings. That's a bad situation to be in and the judges do their best to be able to tell whether the restraining order that's filed has merit or not, but they have to take the statements at face value to protect the potential or alleged victim.
Mila:Without giving the person an opportunity to respond.
Ilona:Correct. So in some counties the notice must be given to the person against whom you're seeking a restraining order unless there is good cause not to that may result in more violence or them taking off with the children out of state, or if it's related to financial abuse in addition to physical or emotional abuse, that they could move money, then you will provide good cause to the judge as to why notice of restraining order should not be given, because it can result in greater consequences for the victim. But in San Diego you don't have to give notice and pretty much the first hearing will be scheduled two weeks out and then the victim gets to go and tell their story without a response.
Mila:What's the standard Like? How bad does the abuse have to be for a judge to grant a restraining order?
Ilona:The statutes get more vague and more vague as years go by, shopper. So there doesn't have to be just physical abuse, obviously. If it's physical abuse, then it's a slam dunk restraining order you're going to get and hopefully the victim was able to take photographs and keep track of their injuries and additionally, and aside from just bringing a restraining order case, if they're going through a divorce or if they have any sort of relationship, dating relationship, anything else you can also bring a civil complaint in civil court and sue for domestic violence and for assault, up to three years after the incident happened, to recover financial damages in civil court against the perpetrator of domestic violence. For physical abuse, that's easy to prove and especially if you have medical records. But yes, there's also emotional abuse.
Ilona:Emotional abuse is harder to prove. Yes, there's also emotional abuse. Emotional abuse is harder to prove. But the way you'll normally see it and you have to be able to describe it all to the court, either through testimony or declarations is it can come in a form of coercive control friends from their children, from their close support system, manipulating the financials, threatening the person to you know, threatening them in such a way that holds them back from exercising their legal right to take any sort of action, for example threatening hey, I'm going to report you to the IRS or I'm going to not help you get your immigration papers like restraining them from exercising some sort of legal right or benefit they may otherwise have. So but emotional distress in general In California you can get a restraining order if it disturbs your peace.
Ilona:If you disturb your peace, then you can get a restraining order, but you have to be able to explain how it disturbs your peace. It has to be severe enough so that it would be disturbing, not something basic. But if there is a long history of recurring emotional abuse screaming at the children in front of the children, name calling. If someone went to a therapist to document it, that's strong to show like, hey, I've been going to therapy to deal with verbal abuse and this is what I've learned.
Mila:So, from your experience, why do some victims hesitate to file restraining orders if they have claims?
Ilona:I think because they're victims of domestic violence and they are attached and codependent with the abuser. But more often it can be because they're financially dependent on that person and they do not know their rights. They don't know they can get child support if they have children together. If they're married, they can get spouse support from the abuser. If they're married, they can get spouse support from the abuser. They also have rights to, if they're married, to community property and assets and money that's in the bank that they may have previously not had access to. Sometimes victims of domestic violence are given X amount of dollars a month to spend on a credit card or there's a limit and they're controlled by their abuser and they don't have access to their cars or bank accounts. So there's a lot of financial power to be gained through obtaining child support or spouse support orders, especially in the restraining order proceeding, because you can get those a lot sooner than if you just filed for divorce or paternity action.
Mila:And a good family law firm like ours has, like internal forensic accounting folks who specialize in that right.
Ilona:Well, yes, Certified family law specialists should, and most of us know how to read financials, how to analyze tax returns, how to add things back that sometimes the victim will say, hey, well, he doesn't show any income or she doesn't show any income. They write everything off. They live off free perks that they get through their businesses. That's where you need a help of forensic accountants.
Mila:Are there ever situations where you recommend to your clients to get restraining orders and, if so, why? What is the benefit of that?
Ilona:Absolutely, and if so, why? What is the benefit of that? Absolutely. Sometimes, when I listen to victims of domestic violence that came to talk about divorce but they've been physically abused by their spouse and possibly as recently as within a month or so, they came to see me. I absolutely recommend that they seek a restraining order because there's a history of recurring abuse. I would absolutely recommend anyone who's being abused in any way to get a restraining order, at least temporarily, and especially when they're going to be going through a legal proceeding, whether it's custody battle or divorce.
Mila:I don't know about you, but I think probably my favorite part about being a lawyer and I love a lot of things about being a lawyer and I love a lot of things about being a lawyer, which I know most lawyers don't say that Most lawyers talk badly about the profession. I love being a lawyer. I think it's great. I don't think I would want to do any other profession profession, but my favorite part is watching, you know, people who were victims step into their power and feel empowered again, and I see that a lot in the employment context I was saying before. They come to me when they're in their darkest, most difficult places they lose their jobs, they're disabled or for whatever reason, and then seeing them kind of feel empowered again and feeling like, oh, there's a light at the end of the tunnel really makes me feel purpose. And I don't know if you feel the same way with family and love people.
Ilona:I do, I really I care most. I mean, I care about my clients, but it really bothers me when someone gets abused and they have children together and they don't stand up for themselves, because it has such a great impact on the psyche of those children. It is your absolute duty when there is domestic violence in your home to stand up, not just for yourself but for your children. You owe it to them. You had those children. You have a duty to protect them.
Mila:Yeah, I definitely think this conversation is important, both you know. From the family law perspective, I think it's important to address what are the rights of victims. I think a lot of times, victims don't know.
Ilona:I think it was interesting to know what employers can do to properly address complaints and make sure it's a healthy and positive work environment for everybody that's there. I think it's important to protect people from any sort of abuse that can happen at work. It's difficult to know and understand your rights there. I think it's important to protect people from any sort of abuse that can happen at work.
Mila:It's difficult to know and understand your rights and I think even us having this podcast. It's great and we have a lot of guests on. But you know, at our core, our passion and our real careers are being lawyers and standing up for people and fighting for people's rights. Up for people and fighting for people's rights. So every time we can get on here and spread the word about here's what you can do if you are being wronged, here's what you can do if you are a victim of X, y and Z and we can help you, we should do that. We should take those opportunities. Whether you're facing a toxic workplace or trying to navigate a volatile relationship, remember you're not alone.
Ilona:There is real support out there and if you're feeling unsure, confused or even afraid to take action. That does not make you weak, it makes you human.
Mila:We hope this conversation gave you clarity, confidence and maybe a little courage.
Ilona:If you found this helpful, please share it with someone who might need it and, as always, if you have questions, we're just a DM away.
Mila:Thanks for listening and make sure you subscribe on YouTube so you never miss an episode.
Ilona:Stay strong stay bold and we'll see you on the next season of the Glamorous Grind, and thank you for making our first season such a success.
