Home/District Court of Appeal of Florida/Lennon v. Hahne

Lennon v. Hahne

202 So. 3d 956, 2016 Fla. App. LEXIS 16223
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedNovember 2, 2016
DocketNo. 4D16-1815
StatusPublished

This text of 202 So. 3d 956 (Lennon v. Hahne) 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
Lennon v. Hahne, 202 So. 3d 956, 2016 Fla. App. LEXIS 16223 (Fla. Ct. App. 2016).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. Appellant is not precluded from filing any future motions to modify or dissolve the injunction for consideration by the trial court. See Betterman v. Kukelhan, 977 So.2d 702, 703 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008).

Affirmed.

CIKLIN, C.J., DAMOORGIAN and KLINGENSMITH, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Betterman v. Kukelhan
977 So. 2d 702 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2008)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
202 So. 3d 956, 2016 Fla. App. LEXIS 16223, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lennon-v-hahne-fladistctapp-2016.