Evidence was sufficient to support the trial court’s finding of fact that plaintiff suffered substantial emotional distress due to defendant’s continued harassment, which supported the conclusion that defendant committed an act of domestic violence. Defendant failed to preserve his objection to plaintiff’s testimony regarding her panic attacks and eating disorder and failed to make an offer of proof regarding evidence excluded by the trial court, thereby waiving his right to argue about either issue on appeal. 



Following trial on plaintiff’s request for a domestic violence protective order, the trial court concluded that defendant committed an act of domestic violence by placing plaintiff in fear of continued harassment that rises to such a level as to inflict substantial emotional distress. This conclusion was supported by findings of fact that defendant threatened to kill plaintiff if she left him, continuously messaged her after she told him not to contact her and threatened to stalk her. The court of appeals rejected the defendant’s argument that evidence was not sufficient to support the findings that plaintiff suffered substantial emotional distress. Plaintiff’s testimony that she was afraid of defendant, that she suffered an eating disorder and panic attacks due to his conduct, and that she had developed hypertension and was “stressed out, overwhelmed, .. unable to eat or sleep … [and] struggling to keep [her] job … because [she] can’t function,” was sufficient evidence to support the trial court’s findings of fact.