AMY HAIR, APPELLANT,
v.
CAMMY HAIR, 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.
The Fourth District Court of Appeal reversed a domestic violence injunction, holding that a daughter's unwillingness to see or interact with her mother, absent evidence of actual domestic violence or imminent danger, does not constitute sufficient grounds for a protective order.
No. A petitioner may not obtain a domestic violence injunction merely because a daughter does not wish to see or interact with her mother, nor does a violation of a domestic relations order support entry of a domestic violence restraining order absent evidence of actual domestic violence or imminent danger.
[1] A petition for protection against domestic violence requires a showing that the petitioner is a victim of domestic violence or has reasonable cause to believe they are in…
[2] To determine if fear of imminent domestic violence is reasonable, a court must consider current allegations, the parties' behavior within the relationship, and the histor…
Previewing 2 of 5 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“To determine whether the victim's fear of imminent domestic violence 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.'”
Establishes the multi-factor test courts must apply when evaluating domestic violence injunction petitions
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAmy Hair petitioned for a domestic violence injunction against her mother, Cammy Hair. The trial court granted the injunction. Amy alleged that she di…
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 Definition Of Domestic Violence cases and more on FLexlaw
We reverse the final judgment of injunction for protection against domestic violence.
Section 741.30(l)(a), Florida Statutes (2012), provides that a family or household member may file a petition for protection against domestic violence if that person is “either the victim of domestic violence as defined in s. 741.28 or has reasonable cause to believe he or she is in imminent danger of becoming the victim of any. act of domestic violence.” See Malchan v. Howard, 29 So.3d 453, 454 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010). 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. (2012).
To determine whether the victim’s fear of imminent domestic violence 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.’” Malchan, 29 So.3d at 454 (quoting Giallanza v. Giallanza, 787 So.2d 162, 164 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001)).
In order to obtain an injunction against domestic violence, the petitioner must be the object of “malicious harassment that consists at the very least of some threat of imminent violence, which excludes mere uncivil behavior that causes distress or annoyance.” Young v. Young, 96 So.3d 478, 479 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012). “An isolated incident of domestic violence that occurred years before the filing of the petition for injunction is insufficient.” Arnold v. Santana, 122 So.3d 512, 514 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013).
In this case, the petitioner failed to present sufficient evidence that she was a victim of domestic violence or was in imminent danger of becoming a victim of domestic violence. That a daughter does not wish to see or interact with her mother is not a basis for the issuance of a domestic violence restraining order. See Stone v. *986 Stone, 128 So.3d 239, 241 (Fla. 4th DCA 2013). Nor did appellant’s violation of an order entered as part of a domestic relations case support the entry of the restraining order in this case.
We therefore reverse and remand with instructions to vacate the final judgment of injunction for protection.
GROSS, CONNER and KLINGENSMITH, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Robinson v. Noemi Robinson, 257 So. 3d 1187 (Fla. 5th DCA 2018)
Authorities Cited
- Boyd v. State, 787 So. 2d 162 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001)
- Stone v. Stone, 128 So. 3d 239 (Fla. 4th DCA 2013)
- Young v. Young, 96 So. 3d 478 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012)
- Eddison Arnold v. Coralis Santana, 122 So. 3d 512 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013)
- Malchan v. Leis Howard, 29 So. 3d 453 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010)