Tacy v. Sedlar

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Tacy v. Sedlar

15 So. 3d 24, 2009 Fla. App. LEXIS 4421, 2009 WL 1260341

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMay 8, 2009

Docket2D08-3101

StatusPublished

This text of 15 So. 3d 24 (Tacy v. Sedlar) 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

Tacy v. Sedlar, 15 So. 3d 24, 2009 Fla. App. LEXIS 4421, 2009 WL 1260341 (Fla. Ct. App. 2009).

Pincite

Opinion

KHOUZAM, Judge.

Timothy Justin Tacy appeals an order modifying a final judgment of injunction for protection against domestic violence. The modification order added, as a protected party, Mr. Tac/s and Cynthia Den-ice Sedlar’s teenaged child and ordered Mr. Tacy to have no contact whatsoever with the parties’ child. We reverse.

The preexisting injunction, which Ms. Sedlar sought to modify, did not include a determination concerning the parties’ child and Ms. Sedlar did not seek to modify the final judgment of injunction for reasons *25 related to her own protection. In fact, the relief sought by Ms. Sedlar was more akin to that which would be sought in an initial petition for a domestic violence injunction on behalf of a minor child than it was to that which would be sought in a modification proceeding. Regardless of whether this is viewed as a modification proceeding or a new proceeding, the evidence was not sufficient to support the relief granted by the trial court.

At the evidentiary hearing held in this action, Ms. Sedlar established no conduct on the part of Mr. Tacy that demonstrated domestic violence as related to the parties’ child. Indeed, Ms. Sedlar testified that she was not scared — she simply did not want Mr. Tacy to have any involvement with the parties’ child. In short, her testimony belied her claim for injunctive relief. Because the evidence was insufficient to support the relief granted by the trial court, we reverse and remand with directions to vacate the modification order.

Reversed and remanded with directions.

NORTHCUTT, C.J., and FULMER, J„ Concur.

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

KHOUZAM, Judge.

Timothy Justin Tacy appeals an order modifying a final judgment of injunction for protection against domestic violence. The modification order added, as a protected party, Mr. Tac/s and Cynthia Den-ice Sedlar’s teenaged child and ordered Mr. Tacy to have no contact whatsoever with the parties’ child. We reverse.

The preexisting injunction, which Ms. Sedlar sought to modify, did not include a determination concerning the parties’ child and Ms. Sedlar did not seek to modify the final judgment of injunction for reasons *25 related to her own protection. In fact, the relief sought by Ms. Sedlar was more akin to that which would be sought in an initial petition for a domestic violence injunction on behalf of a minor child than it was to that which would be sought in a modification proceeding. Regardless of whether this is viewed as a modification proceeding or a new proceeding, the evidence was not sufficient to support the relief granted by the trial court.

At the evidentiary hearing held in this action, Ms. Sedlar established no conduct on the part of Mr. Tacy that demonstrated domestic violence as related to the parties’ child. Indeed, Ms. Sedlar testified that she was not scared — she simply did not want Mr. Tacy to have any involvement with the parties’ child. In short, her testimony belied her claim for injunctive relief. Because the evidence was insufficient to support the relief granted by the trial court, we reverse and remand with directions to vacate the modification order.

Reversed and remanded with directions.

NORTHCUTT, C.J., and FULMER, J„ Concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

15 So. 3d 24, 2009 Fla. App. LEXIS 4421, 2009 WL 1260341, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/tacy-v-sedlar-fladistctapp-2009.