Whyce v. Petithome , 2016 Fla. App. LEXIS 6350 ( 2016 )


Menu:
  •        Third District Court of Appeal
    State of Florida
    Opinion filed April 27, 2016.
    Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
    ________________
    No. 3D15-2735
    Lower Tribunal No. 15-26096
    ________________
    Rashad Whyce,
    Appellant,
    vs.
    Albertte Petithome,
    Appellee.
    An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Michelle
    Gonzalez-Paulson, Judge.
    Chantale L. Suttle, for appellant.
    Albertte Petithome, in proper person.
    Before ROTHENBERG, FERNANDEZ and SCALES, JJ.
    FERNANDEZ, J.
    Rashad Whyce appeals a temporary injunction for protection against
    domestic violence, issued on October 29, 2015, pursuant to Florida Statute section
    741.30. Whyce claims that the subject temporary injunction was issued after a full
    hearing, but that the trial court decided to simply extend the temporary injunction
    rather than enter a permanent injunction or decline to issue any injunction at all.
    The docket sheet contained in the record reflects an entry titled “DV Hearing,”
    dated October 29, 2015; however, there is no transcript of a hearing in the record,
    nor does the order on appeal reflect that a hearing was held or that findings were
    made by the trial court.
    Because the order on appeal does not comply with the requirements of
    section 741.30, Florida Statutes, reversal is warranted. The entry of an ex-parte
    temporary injunction pursuant to section 741.30, Florida Statutes, requires a future
    hearing date. See §741.30(5)(c). The order on appeal does not contain a future
    hearing date, nor does it reflect that it is a good cause continuation of the hearing
    required by the statute. A careful review of the order suggests that it was the trial
    court’s intention to simply issue a temporary injunction for a fixed period of time.
    Nevertheless, section 741.30 “does not provide for the issuance of a series of
    temporary injunctions in lieu of a permanent injunction.” See Dietz v. Dietz, 
    127 So. 3d 1279
    (Fla. 5th DCA 2013) and Bacchus v. Bacchus, 
    108 So. 3d 712
    (Fla. 5th
    DCA 2013).
    Reversed and remanded.
    2
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 3D15-2735

Citation Numbers: 190 So. 3d 685, 2016 Fla. App. LEXIS 6350, 2016 WL 1696167

Judges: Rothenberg, Fernandez, Scales

Filed Date: 4/27/2016

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 10/19/2024