Where a judge modified an abuse prevention order by vacating a provision that awarded custody of the couple's children to the plaintiff mother and a provision that prohibited the defendant father from contacting the children, that was an abuse of discretion, as the defendant offered no evidence to rebut the plaintiff's assertion that the children continued to have a reasonable fear of imminent serious physical harm.
"The plaintiff also argues that the judge abused his discretion in failing to make the abuse prevention order permanent. We are not persuaded...Based on the totality of the circumstances, we cannot reasonably say that a two-year extension of the abuse prevention order as to the plaintiff does not adequately protect her...
"For all of these reasons, we vacate so much of the judge's order entered on June 18, 2018, as modified the provisions for custody of, and no contact with, the children. Accordingly, paragraphs six and seven of the original abuse prevention order are reinstated and will remain in effect until the expiration of the current order on June 17, 2020. As so modified, the order is affirmed."
