.. Loading ..

932 So. 2d 393 (Fla. 2nd DCA 2006). Appellant mother and appellee father were divorced under a final judgment of dissolution of marriage. The father filed a supplemental petition in the Circuit Court for Polk County (Florida), for modification of the final judgment. He also filed a motion for a temporary injunction. The trial granted…

SMITH v. CRIDER

932 So. 2d 393 (Fla. 2nd DCA 2006). Appellant mother and appellee father were divorced under a final judgment of dissolution of marriage. The father filed a supplemental petition in the Circuit Court for Polk County (Florida), for modification of the final judgment. He also filed a motion for a temporary injunction. The trial granted the motion. Winter Haven Criminal Defense Attorney Brandon J. Rafool then filed a motion to dissolve the temporary injunction for the Appellant Mother. The trial court denied the motion. Mr. Rafool then appealed the trial court’s denial and personally wrote all the briefs that resulted in the trial court’s reversal by the Second District Court of Appeal. On appeal, the court noted that the father’s motion did not explicitly request ex parte relief. Further, the injunction was not a distinct order entered by the trial judge but rather was a copy of the father’s motion for a temporary injunction that was stamped “Motion Heard, Considered And Granted” and dated and signed by a judge. The appellate court found that entry of the “injunction” or “order” raised due process concerns under Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.610. The order denying the mother’s motion to dissolve a temporary injunction order was reversed, and the trial court was directed to vacate from the temporary order the injunction prohibiting the removal of the children from the jurisdiction of the court. Therefore, the trial court was required to dissolve the injunction and conduct an evidentiary hearing on the father’s temporary injunction motion.