Posted by Nydia Streets of Streets Law in Florida Domestic Violence

When a party violates a temporary domestic violence injunction, can a permanent injunction be entered as a sanction? A temporary injunction is entered without a hearing. The permanent injunction is entered once a full hearing occurs. When parties are neighbors, enforcement of an injunction may be tricky. All of these issues were present in the case Peck v. Rosado, 5D20-2099 (Fla. 5th DCA June 25, 2021).

The parties to this case are neighbors whose homes are a little less than 300 feet apart. The two were friends, but when their relationship ended, the alleged victim sought an injunction against the accused, complaining that she was being stalked. A temporary injunction was entered requiring the accused to stay 500 feet away from the victim. Since the parties’ homes were less than 500 feet apart, the accused filed a motion to clarify and amend the temporary injunction so that she could remain in her home. The trial court eventually entered an order that stated the accused could remain in her home but still could not go within 500 feet of the alleged victim. Two weeks later, the alleged victim filed a motion seeking to hold the accused in contempt of the injunction, alleging she drove in front of her house nine times.

A hearing was held, and although the accused explained she drove in front of the alleged victim’s house because construction blocked her way in the other direction, the trial court entered an order of contempt against the accused. Upon the alleged victim’s request, the court also entered a permanent injunction over the accused’s objection that only the motion for contempt was noticed for hearing. The accused appealed.

The appellate court agreed with the accused that she was deprived of due process and that it was improper to hold her in contempt when the directives of the order were not clear enough. First, the court noted that the only matter noticed for hearing was the contempt issue. So when the trial court went beyond that and entered the permanent injunction, this was error and against the accused’s due process rights. Additionally, the alleged victim was allowed to testify to incidents not mentioned in her motion for contempt which was also a violation of the accused’s due process rights.

Moreover, the appellate court held it was error to enter the permanent injunction as a sanction for contempt. Last, in reversing the contempt order, the court held “Upon review, we find the Amended Modified Temporary Injunction gives insufficient directives to Peck regarding how she can both reside in her residence and comply with the court’s order to stay 500 feet away from Rosado’s residence. Had the trial court tailored the proscribed distance to fit the facts in this case or alternatively restricted Peck from being on Rosado’s property, instead of requiring that she remain 500 feet away, then an ambiguity would not have resulted.”

Schedule a meeting with a Miami family law attorney to understand how the law may apply to your case.