Posted by Nydia Streets of Streets Law in Florida Domestic Violence

How many times can a party file a Florida domestic violence injunction? If the filing is based on the same incident(s), more than one filing may not be allowed depending on the outcome of the first filing. This was an issue in the case Klement v. Kofsman, 4D21-1867 (Fla. 4th DCA March 30, 2022).

The parties were neighbors whose children attended the same daycare center and became friends. Eventually, there was a disagreement between the families, and one parent forbid her child from playing with the other child. After this, it was alleged the parent who forbid the children to play together began harassing the other child. Because of this, the parent of the other child filed a petition for injunction against stalking, alleging multiple incidents in which the accused made the child cry, had a tire swing removed from the child’s family’s property by the homeowner’s association, and placed a “honk your horn” sign in front of the property. This petition was denied. Later, the child’s parent filed another petition making the same allegation and alleging two new allegations concerning the accused’s behavior. At the hearing on the second petition, no evidence or testimony was presented regarding the two new allegations made, but the trial court decided the allegations made in the initial petition was sufficient to support a stalking injunction. The accused appealed.

The appellate court cited the meaning of res judicata: “Res judicata is a judicial doctrine used to bar parties from relitigating claims previously decided by a final adjudication on the merits.” The court found the filing of the petition with the old incidents was barred by res judicata. The court held “Because the first judge had previously considered the incidents described again in the second hearing and found each of them insufficient to constitute qualifying acts of harassment or stalking under the applicable statute, the successor judge was barred by res judicata from reconsidering those same claims and deeming them qualifying incidents. Mere disagreement with conclusions reached by a prior court does not avoid the preclusive effect of res judicata. Even if the successor judge personally felt the incidents described in the first petition did constitute stalking or harassment such that an injunction should have been entered, because those incidents had already been considered, the doctrine of res judicata prevented the successor judge from imposing any injunction based on any incident previously rejected as non-qualifying under the statute.”

The appellate court further held “Although the two newly added claims presented in the second petition may not have been barred by res judicata, the successor judge’s oral pronouncement made clear that she did not base her ruling on the two new incidents or on any previous finding regarding the existence of a qualifying incident.” Schedule your meeting with a Miami family law attorney to understand how the law may apply to the facts of your case.