Andrews v. Byrd

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Andrews v. Byrd

700 So. 2d 1250, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 12225, 1997 WL 672500

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedOctober 30, 1997

DocketNo. 97-1649

StatusPublished

This text of 700 So. 2d 1250 (Andrews v. Byrd) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Andrews v. Byrd, 700 So. 2d 1250, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 12225, 1997 WL 672500 (Fla. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

MeCAULIE, A.J., Associate Judge.

In this appeal of a domestic violence injunction entered pursuant to Chapter 741, Florida Statutes, appellant argues that the injunction was improperly entered because he does not meet the statutory definition of “family or household member.” § 741.28(2), Fla. Stat. While the record does suggest that appellant may indeed not qualify as a “family or household member,” we do not reach this issue because appellant did not raise it before the injunction under review was entered. It was not until after the instant injunction was entered that appellant attempted to clarify on the record his relationship with the appel-lee, who petitioned for entry of the domestic violence injunction. Accordingly, we must affirm. See Rosenberg v. Rosenberg, 511 So.2d 593 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987), rev. denied, 520 So.2d 586 (Fla.1988).

AFFIRMED.

JOANOS and WOLF, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

MeCAULIE, A.J., Associate Judge.

In this appeal of a domestic violence injunction entered pursuant to Chapter 741, Florida Statutes, appellant argues that the injunction was improperly entered because he does not meet the statutory definition of “family or household member.” § 741.28(2), Fla. Stat. While the record does suggest that appellant may indeed not qualify as a “family or household member,” we do not reach this issue because appellant did not raise it before the injunction under review was entered. It was not until after the instant injunction was entered that appellant attempted to clarify on the record his relationship with the appel-lee, who petitioned for entry of the domestic violence injunction. Accordingly, we must affirm. See Rosenberg v. Rosenberg, 511 So.2d 593 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987), rev. denied, 520 So.2d 586 (Fla.1988).

AFFIRMED.

JOANOS and WOLF, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

700 So. 2d 1250, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 12225, 1997 WL 672500, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/andrews-v-byrd-fladistctapp-1997.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack