Department of Health & Rehabilitative Services v. B.W.

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Department of Health & Rehabilitative Services v. B.W.

565 So. 2d 390, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 5896, 1990 WL 112510

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedAugust 9, 1990

DocketNo. 90-225

StatusPublished

This text of 565 So. 2d 390 (Department of Health & Rehabilitative Services v. B.W.) 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

Department of Health & Rehabilitative Services v. B.W., 565 So. 2d 390, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 5896, 1990 WL 112510 (Fla. Ct. App. 1990).

Pincite

Opinion

DAUKSCH, Judge.

This is an appeal from an order refusing to dissolve a temporary injunction. The trial court enjoined appellant from placing appellee’s name in a child abuse registry. See § 415.504(4)(e). This was done on a temporary basis while the trial court could determine all issues presented to it at a full hearing. There were sufficient legal and factual bases for the judge to temporarily hold the parties in status quo (actually status quo ante, because appellant had already placed the name in the registry and the judge ordered it deleted) until the parties both had an opportunity to fully present their evidence and contentions to the court. The order was the most fair and prudent step to take and it is affirmed.

AFFIRMED.

COBB and COWART, JJ., concur.

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

DAUKSCH, Judge.

This is an appeal from an order refusing to dissolve a temporary injunction. The trial court enjoined appellant from placing appellee’s name in a child abuse registry. See § 415.504(4)(e). This was done on a temporary basis while the trial court could determine all issues presented to it at a full hearing. There were sufficient legal and factual bases for the judge to temporarily hold the parties in status quo (actually status quo ante, because appellant had already placed the name in the registry and the judge ordered it deleted) until the parties both had an opportunity to fully present their evidence and contentions to the court. The order was the most fair and prudent step to take and it is affirmed.

AFFIRMED.

COBB and COWART, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

565 So. 2d 390, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 5896, 1990 WL 112510, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/department-of-health-rehabilitative-services-v-bw-fladistctapp-1990.