KATARZYNA MORIGGIA, APPELLANT,
v.
OSCAR S. MORIGGIA, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
Katarzyna Moriggia appealed a domestic violence injunction issued in favor of Oscar S. Moriggia. The appellate court reversed because there was no evidence that Oscar was either a victim of domestic violence or had reasonable cause to believe he was in imminent danger of becoming one.
The trial court erred in issuing the injunction because there was no evidentiary support that Katarzyna had been physically abusive toward Oscar or that Oscar had reasonable cause to believe he would become a victim of domestic violence. The court reversed the final judgment of injunction.
[1] A court may issue an injunction for protection against domestic violence only if the petitioner is a victim of domestic violence or has reasonable cause to believe they a…
[2] The definition of domestic violence includes assault, battery, stalking, and other criminal offenses resulting in physical injury or death of one family or household memb…
Previewing 2 of 4 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“A court may issue an injunction when it appears that the petitioner is either the victim of domestic violence or 'has reasonable cause to believe he or she is in imminent danger of becoming a victim of domestic violence.'”
Establishes the legal standard for issuing domestic violence injunctions under Florida law
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe case involved a domestic violence injunction with minor children after notice. The only testimony about physical abuse between the parties establi…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Reasonable Cause To Believe In Imminent Danger cases and more on FLexlaw
Katarzyna Moriggia challenges a final judgment of injunction for protection against domestic violence with minor children after notice in favor of Oscar S. Mor-iggia. Because there was no evidence that the petitioner was either the victim of domestic violence or had reasonable cause to believe he was in imminent danger of becoming a victim of domestic violence, we reverse.
Domestic violence is defined as “any assault, aggravated assault, battery, aggravated battery, sexual assault, sexual battery, stalking, aggravated stalking, kidnapping, false imprisonment, or any criminal offense resulting in physical injury or death of one family or household member by another family or household member.” § 741.28(2), Fla. Stat. (2009).
“A court may issue an injunction when it appears that the petitioner is either the victim of domestic violence or ‘has reasonable cause to believe he or she is in imminent danger of becoming a victim of domestic violence.’ ” Ambrefe v. Ambrefe, 993 So.2d 98, 98 (Fla. 2d DCA 2008) (quoting 741.30(l)(a), Fla. Stat. (2007)). In determining whether the victim’s fear is reasonable, “the trial court must consider the current allegations, the parties’ behavior within the relationship, and the history of the relationship as a whole.” Giallanza v. Giallanza, 787 So.2d 162, 164 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001) (citing Gustafson v. Maude, 743 So.2d 614, 616 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999)); see also 741.30(6)(b), Fla. Stat. (2008).
Jones v. Jones, 32 So.3d 772, 774 (Fla. 2d DCA 2010).
In this case, there is no evidentiary support for the proposition that Katarzyna has been physically abusive toward Oscar. Similarly, there is nothing to support the conclusion that Oscar has reasonable cause to believe that he will be the victim of domestic violence. In fact, the only testimony presented at the hearing about physical abuse between Oscar and Katarzyna was that Oscar had abused Katarzyna— not the other way around.
For these reasons, the trial court erred in entering the final judgment for protection against domestic violence. Accordingly, we reverse the final judgment of injunction.
Reversed.
CASANUEVA, C.J., and CRENSHAW, J., Concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Boyd v. State, 787 So. 2d 162 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001)
- Gustafson v. Mauck, 743 So. 2d 614 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999)
- Jones v. Jones, 32 So. 3d 772 (Fla. 2d DCA 2010)
- Ambrefe v. Ambrefe, 993 So. 2d 98 (Fla. 2d DCA 2008)