Krapf v. Quinones

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Krapf v. Quinones

905 So. 2d 935, 2005 Fla. App. LEXIS 8876, 2005 WL 1364512

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided June 10, 2005·No. No. 5D04-3239·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The sole issue raised in this appeal is whether the trial court erred in granting a permanent final judgment of injunction for the protection of the appellee against repeat violence, in accordance with section 784.046, Florida Statutes (2004), and Rule 12.610, Family Law Rules of Procedure. After careful review of the record, we conclude that the injunction is amply supported by competent, substantial evidence, including evidence meeting the definition of repeat violence. See Ravitch v. Whelan, 851 So.2d 271 (Fla. 5th DCA 2003). See [936]*936also Huch v. Marrs, 858 So.2d 1202 (Fla. 3d DCA 2003).

AFFIRMED.

SHARP, W., PETERSON, and MONACO, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

The sole issue raised in this appeal is whether the trial court erred in granting a permanent final judgment of injunction for the protection of the appellee against repeat violence, in accordance with section 784.046, Florida Statutes (2004), and Rule 12.610, Family Law Rules of Procedure. After careful review of the record, we conclude that the injunction is amply supported by competent, substantial evidence, including evidence meeting the definition of repeat violence. See Ravitch v. Whelan, 851 So.2d 271 (Fla. 5th DCA 2003). See [936]*936also Huch v. Marrs, 858 So.2d 1202 (Fla. 3d DCA 2003).

AFFIRMED.

SHARP, W., PETERSON, and MONACO, JJ., concur.

Krapf v. Quinones, 905 So. 2d 935, 2005 Fla. App. LEXIS 8876, 2005 WL 1364512 (Fla. Ct. App. 2005).

Pincite

905 So. 2d 935 (Krapf v. Quinones) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related