HELENA MONTEMARANO, APPELLANT,
v.
ROBERT MONTEMARANO, APPELLEE

Fla. 4th DCA | 2001-07-24
No. 4D01-2807
POLEN, C.J., STONE and TAYLOR, JJ., concur.
792 So. 2d 573 Florida District Court of Appeal, Fourth District (2001) Positive Treatment
Cited by 3 cases

Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

We treat Appellant’s petition as a request for appellate review of a final judgment of injunction for protection against domestic violence and reverse the portion of the order requiring Appellant to vacate the premises. Due process requires that a party receive notice and an opportunity to be heard prior to entry of an order that affects her interests. Cortina v. Cortina, 98 So. 2d 384 (Fla.1957); Szymanski v. Szymanski, 603 So. 2d 73, 74 (Fla. 4th DCA 1992), Appellee did not seek exclusive use and possession of the residence.

That portion of the trial court is quashed and this case is remanded for further proceedings.

POLEN, C.J., STONE and TAYLOR, JJ., concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Cervieri v. Cervieri, 814 So. 2d 528 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002)
    …itive family issues ran afoul of basic procedural requirements: notice and an opportunity to be heard. These procedural requirements are essential in hearings where a trial court changes the custody of minor children. See Montemarano v. Montemarano, 792 So. 2d 573 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001). For this reason, the trial court’s order is reversed. In this case, the husband petitioned the trial court for a domestic violence injunction for protection against his wife. The petition alleged that the wife had been arrested…
  • Williams v. Williams (Fla. 4th DCA 2026)

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw