Montemarano v. Montemarano

792 So. 2d 573, 2001 Fla. App. LEXIS 10341, 2001 WL 830653
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedJuly 24, 2001
DocketNo. 4D01-2807
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 792 So. 2d 573 (Montemarano v. Montemarano) 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
Montemarano v. Montemarano, 792 So. 2d 573, 2001 Fla. App. LEXIS 10341, 2001 WL 830653 (Fla. Ct. App. 2001).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We treat Appellant’s petition as a request for appellate review of a final judgment of injunction for protection against domestic violence and reverse the portion of the order requiring Appellant to vacate the premises. Due process requires that a party receive notice and an opportunity to be heard prior to entry of an order that affects her interests. Cortina v. Cortina, 98 So.2d 384 (Fla.1957); Szymanski v. Szymanski, 603 So.2d 73, 74 (Fla. 4th DCA 1992), Appellee did not seek exclusive use and possession of the residence.

That portion of the trial court is quashed and this case is remanded for further proceedings.

POLEN, C.J., STONE and TAYLOR, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Cervieri v. Cervieri
814 So. 2d 528 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2002)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
792 So. 2d 573, 2001 Fla. App. LEXIS 10341, 2001 WL 830653, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/montemarano-v-montemarano-fladistctapp-2001.