S.E.R. v. J.R.

District Court of Appeal of Florida

S.E.R. v. J.R.

803 So. 2d 861, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 9, 2002 WL 4580

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJanuary 2, 2002

DocketNo. 4D01-4142

StatusPublished

This text of 803 So. 2d 861 (S.E.R. v. J.R.) 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

S.E.R. v. J.R., 803 So. 2d 861, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 9, 2002 WL 4580 (Fla. Ct. App. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

In their petition for writ of cer-tiorari, petitioners seek review of the circuit court’s order denying their motion to dismiss the underlying domestic violence injunction proceedings. In those proceedings, the circuit court entered a temporary award of custody. Petitioners moved to dismiss the injunction proceedings based on the pendency of a dependency action in Palm Beach County,¹ in which a custody order was entered contrary to the custody award below. Petitioners correctly argue, and respondent agrees, that the circuit court below may not enforce its custody [862]*862award because precedence is given to the custody orders entered in the dependency case. See §§ 39.013(4), 39.521(3)(b)1., Fla. Stat. (2001); Fla. R. Juv. P. 8.260(d). However, petitioners have failed to establish that the circuit court’s denial of the motion to dismiss causes them the irreparable harm necessary for certiorari review. See Bared & Co., Inc. v. McGuire, 670 So.2d 153, 156 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996). There is no indication that the circuit court below is refusing to comply with the statutory precedence provisions; the court appears to be proceeding only with injunction matters which do not include the enforcement of the court’s custody award. Thus, there is no indication that petitioners are suffering irreparable harm as a result of the denial of the motion to dismiss.

We therefore, dismiss the petition for writ of certiorari.

GUNTHER, STONE and HAZOURI, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

In their petition for writ of cer-tiorari, petitioners seek review of the circuit court’s order denying their motion to dismiss the underlying domestic violence injunction proceedings. In those proceedings, the circuit court entered a temporary award of custody. Petitioners moved to dismiss the injunction proceedings based on the pendency of a dependency action in Palm Beach County,¹ in which a custody order was entered contrary to the custody award below. Petitioners correctly argue, and respondent agrees, that the circuit court below may not enforce its custody [862]*862award because precedence is given to the custody orders entered in the dependency case. See §§ 39.013(4), 39.521(3)(b)1., Fla. Stat. (2001); Fla. R. Juv. P. 8.260(d). However, petitioners have failed to establish that the circuit court’s denial of the motion to dismiss causes them the irreparable harm necessary for certiorari review. See Bared & Co., Inc. v. McGuire, 670 So.2d 153, 156 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996). There is no indication that the circuit court below is refusing to comply with the statutory precedence provisions; the court appears to be proceeding only with injunction matters which do not include the enforcement of the court’s custody award. Thus, there is no indication that petitioners are suffering irreparable harm as a result of the denial of the motion to dismiss.

We therefore, dismiss the petition for writ of certiorari.

GUNTHER, STONE and HAZOURI, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

803 So. 2d 861, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 9, 2002 WL 4580, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ser-v-jr-fladistctapp-2002.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack