LATONYA HOLTON
v.
LEONARD HOLTON JR.
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
An injunction for protection against domestic violence based on alleged cyber-stalking through social media posts must be supported by sufficient factual findings and cannot be broader than necessary to provide relief.
[1] To obtain an injunction for protection against cyber-stalking, the petitioner must establish that a series of electronic communications caused the petitioner substantial…
[2] An injunction against domestic violence must not be broader than necessary to secure the injured party relief warranted by the circumstances of the particular case.
Previewing 2 of 2 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“In order to succeed in a petition for injunction against cyberstalking, the petitioner must establish that a series of electronic communications directed at the petitioner caused substantial emotional distress and served no legitimate purpose.”
Standard for cyber-stalking injunctions, citing Scott v. Blum, 191 So. 3d 502, 504 (Fla. 2d DCA 2016)
Latonya Holton appealed an injunction for protection against domestic violence issued against her by her husband, which prohibited her from posting de…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Overbroad Injunction cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Latonya Holton, pro se, appeals the entry of an injunction for protection against domestic violence, the primary basis of which was allegations of cyber-stalking arising from her social media posts concerning her husband, the Appellee. The trial court ordered that Holton was prohibited from posting derogatory posts or videos about her husband for a year. Upon review of the record, including the hearing transcript, it is evident that an insufficient factual basis existed for entry of the injunction and that the injunction was overbroad. See Scott v. Blum, 191 So. 3d 502, 504 (Fla. 2d DCA 2016) (“In order to succeed in a petition for injunction against cyberstalking, the petitioner must establish that a series of electronic communications directed at the petitioner caused substantial emotional distress and served no legitimate purpose.”); Chevaldina v. R.K./FL Mgmt., Inc., 133 So. 3d 1086, 1091 (Fla. 3d
DCA 2014) (“An injunction should never be broader than is necessary to secure to the injured party relief warranted by the circumstances involved in the particular case.”). For these reasons, we reverse the final judgment entering the injunction. All pending motions are denied as moot.
REVERSED.
WOLF, MAKAR, and NORDBY, JJ., concur. _____________________________
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Chevaldina v. R.K./FL Mgmt., Inc., 133 So. 3d 1086 (Fla. 3d DCA 2014)
- Scott v. Frederic A. Blum, 191 So. 3d 502 (Fla. 2d DCA 2016)