From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Rodman v. Rodman

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District
Dec 3, 2010
48 So. 3d 1022 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2010)

Opinion

No. 1D07-5540.

December 3, 2010.

An appeal from the Circuit Court for Jackson County. William L. Wright, Judge.

Scott T. Manion of Legal Services of North Florida, Inc., and Wendy S. Loquasto of Fox Loquasto, P.A., Tallahassee, for Appellant.

Niah Rodman, pro se, Appellee.


ON MOTION FOR REHEARING


This case was originally dismissed as moot. However, injunctions for protection against domestic violence are an exception to the usual rules of mootness because of the collateral legal consequences that flow from such an injunction. See Godwin v. State, 593 So.2d 211 (Fla. 1992). Therefore, the appellant's motion for rehearing is granted. The opinion dated July 13, 2009 is withdrawn and this opinion is substituted in its place.

On the merits, the injunction for protection against domestic violence is quashed because the petition did not allege, and the testimony at hearing did not establish, that the appellant and the appellee resided in the same household as required by section 741.30, Florida Statutes (2007).

KAHN, THOMAS, and ROBERTS, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Rodman v. Rodman

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District
Dec 3, 2010
48 So. 3d 1022 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2010)
Case details for

Rodman v. Rodman

Case Details

Full title:Denise RODMAN, Appellant, v. Niah RODMAN, Appellee

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District

Date published: Dec 3, 2010

Citations

48 So. 3d 1022 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2010)

Citing Cases

Bell v. Battaglia

e expired, we reverse and remand the case to the trial court with instructions to vacate the injunction.");…

Pryor v. Pryor

’ ” (citation omitted)). While “injunctions for protection against domestic violence are an exception to the…