Posted by Nydia Streets of Streets Law in Florida Domestic Violence

When a romantic relationship ends, one party may have trouble accepting it is over, while the other party may wish to move on quickly. Usually, the party who cannot accept the end of the relationship repeatedly contacts the other party, sends gifts, etc. When does this behavior rise to the level of stalking under Florida domestic violence laws? This was an issue in the case Decker v. Munson, 2D20-1303 (Fla. 2d DCA May 28, 2021).

The alleged victim was a student and the alleged stalker was a professor at the same university and were involved in a brief romantic relationship. When the student ended the relationship, the professor sent her text messages and emails, as well as a birthday gift. The professor showed up at a restaurant where the student worked even though she asked him not to. When the student asked the professor to leave her alone, the professor sent more messages, but ultimately conceded in the messages that he would leave her alone if that was her wish. The student blocked the professor on social media and text message, and the professor did not try to reach her after he sent the messages shortly after the restaurant visit. However, several months later, the student sought an injunction against the professor because he tried to communicate with her sister and because he added her on social media.

The student also sought a no contact order through the university. The professor explained that he accidentally added the student on Snapchat because he was gathering evidence to defend himself against the no contact order, and that he added her thinking it would help him retrieve old messages between them. Although he had the ability to do so, he did not send the student any messages on that platform. He also explained that he went to the restaurant because he wanted to assure her that her place at the university was safe. This was the first time he heard from her that she wanted no contact and he abided by her wishes shortly after that. The trial court entered a one-year injunction against the professor and he appealed.

The appellate court noted “Many courts, including this one, have determined that the reasonable person standard for substantial emotional distress is not met where the party against whom the injunction is sought has contacted or attempted to contact the petitioner without permission but where no threats were made or no public embarrassment was involved.” The court continued “The facts of this case establish that no threats were made; indeed, [the student'] conceded that [the professor] never threatened her with physical harm or made attempts to sabotage her studies or career [. . .] Likewise, we are not convinced that [the professor’s] actions were malicious in nature as required by section 784.048(2) as they were not wrongful or without legal justification. (internal citation omitted). The record evidence reflects that [the professor’s] November 2019 attempts to contact [the student] were predicated on his confusion about the status of their relationship and his apparent concern for her wellbeing. Once [the student] made it clear that she did not want any further contact with him, [the professor] stopped trying to directly communicate with her. The record indicates that [the professor] made a single attempt to contact [the student’s] sister, and his messages contained expressions of concern about [the student]. Finally, [the professor] provided an unrefuted explanation for why he added [the student] on Snapchat and Facebook, and there is no indication that he used those "connections" to try to communicate with [the student] in any manner.”

If you need help pursuing or defending a stalking injunction in Florida, schedule a consultation with a Miami family law attorney.