The findings revealed many similarities between the two types of orders. Consistent with past research, it was found that incidents of re-abuse were lower for both offenders (in criminal order of protection (OP) cases) and respondents (in civil OP cases) who did not have a prior criminal record. Findings also revealed that experiences of petitioners who filed civil OPs were not markedly different than victims who filed criminal OPs. The striking similarities across orders notwithstanding the findings from this study revealed an important difference between the two groups concerning the primary reason for filing. Victims in criminal OP cases were more likely to document physical abuse as the reason for issuance of the order, whereas petitioners in civil OP cases identified emotional abuse as the behavior that prompted them to seek a protective order. Past research has identified many potential advantages of civil protection orders as a means of addressing domestic violence without invoking an official response of the criminal justice system. The primary purpose of this study was to provide an initial comparison of civil orders of protection with criminal orders of protection to determine what, if any, salient differences exist between the two strategies. The study began with an examination of the demographic characteristics of civil respondents with criminal defendants and civil petitioners with crime victims. It then provided an analysis of case characteristics for each type of order, and concluded with a comparison of violations of criminal and civil orders, and the nature of the abuse leading up to the filing of the protection order. Tables and references