Appellant-father challenged the District Court’s issuance of an order for protection (OFP), arguing, inter alia, that the District Court’s findings did not support the OFP. The Court of Appeals noted that the District Court found that the domestic abuse that occurred was threats of harm to respondent and others with purpose to cause grave fear in respondent. From this record, the court was required to infer that the threats of harm were based on respondent’s allegations that throughout the marriage respondent threatened to kill her if she were ever with another man. The court held that the finding adequately supported the OFP. Affirmed; motions denied.