CATHERINE LOUISE WALER, PETITIONER,
v.
AARON WADE LOVETT, RESPONDENT

Fla. 5th DCA | 2005-06-24
No. 5D05-350
SAWAYA, C.J., and PLEUS, J., concur.
905 So. 2d 972 Florida District Court of Appeal, Fifth District (2005) Caution
Cited by 2 cases

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.

Synopsis

Catherine Louise Waler sought an injunction for protection against dating violence under Florida law. The trial court dismissed her petition after an ex parte hearing, but the appellate court reversed, finding Waler's allegations sufficient to warrant a temporary injunction and a full hearing.


Holding

Waler's petition contained sufficient allegations satisfying the statutory requirements for dating violence protection, and she was entitled to a temporary injunction pending a full hearing based on the appearance of an immediate and present danger of violence.


Headnotes

[1] A petition for an injunction against dating violence is reviewable as a non-final order denying an injunction.

[2] Dating violence requires a continuing and significant relationship of a romantic or intimate nature, characterized by the expectation of affection or sexual involvement a…

Previewing 2 of 4 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

Key Quotes

“Any person who is the victim of dating violence and has reasonable cause to believe he or she is in imminent danger of becoming the victim of another act of dating violence, or any person who has reasonable cause to believe he or she is in imminent danger of becoming the victim of an act of dating violence, ... has standing in the circuit court to file a sworn petition for an injunction for protection against dating violence.”

Establishes the statutory standing requirement for seeking an injunction for protection against dating violence

Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Facts & Procedural History

Waler alleged a dating relationship with Aaron Wade Lovett from June 4, 2004 to October 31, 2004, characterized by frequent and intimate interaction. …

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.


Opinion of the Court
PETERSON, J.

PETERSON, J.

Catherine Louise Waler petitions for certiorari review of the trial court’s order dismissing her petition for an injunction against “dating violence” pursuant to section 784.046(2)(b), Florida Statutes (2004). The trial court denied Waler’s petition as being insufficient after an ex parte hearing. We treat the petition for certiorari as an appeal of a non-final order that denies an injunction pursuant to Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.130(a)(3)(B), and reverse.

Section 784.046, Florida Statutes, provides in relevant parts:

(l)(a) “Violence” means any assault, aggravated assault, battery, aggravated battery, sexual assault, sexual battery, stalking, aggravated stalking, kidnapping, or false imprisonment, or any criminal offense resulting in physical injury or death, by a person against any other person.

* * *

(d) “Dating violence” means violence between individuals who have or have had a continuing and significant relationship of a romantic or intimate nature. The existence of such a relationship shall be determined based on the consideration of the following factors:

1. A dating relationship must have existed within the past six months;

2. The nature of the relationship must have been characterized by the expectation of affection or sexual involvement between the parties; and

3. The frequency and type of interaction between the persons involved in the relationship must have included that the persons have been involved over time and on a continuous basis during the course of the relationship.

(2)(b) Any person who is the victim of dating violence and has reasonable cause to believe he or she is in imminent danger of becoming the victim of another act of dating violence, or any person who has reasonable cause to believe he or she is in imminent danger of becoming the victim of an act of dating violence, ... has standing in the circuit court to file a sworn petition for an injunction for protection against dating violence.

Our review of Waler’s petition to the trial court indicates that she complied with the required allegations entitling her to a full hearing on her petition. She alleged that she had a dating relationship with Aaron Wade Lovett from June 4, 2004 to October 31, 2004, thereby satisfying the requirement that the petitioner had a relationship with the respondent -within six months of filing a petition and that the interaction during that period was frequent and intimate. Waler also alleged acts of violence committed by Lovett against her on at least two occasions, one in which her companion’s elbow was shattered by a club wielded by Lovett. On that occasion, Lovett also pointed the club at Waler as he entered his automobile to depart and told her that she was “dead.”

Based on the allegations of Waler’s petition, it appears that an immediate and present danger of violence exists; accordingly, we direct the trial court to grant Waler a temporary injunction pending a full hearing. § 784.046(6)(a), Fla. Stat. (2004).

REVERSED AND REMANDED.

SAWAYA, C.J., and PLEUS, J., concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Alderman v. Faylene A. Thomas, 141 So. 3d 668 (Fla. 2d DCA 2014)
    …sonableness of his or her fear that the danger of violence is ‘imminent’ ”). Thomas did not present any evidence that Alderman had threatened her or had done anything else that would support an objective fear of imminent danger. Cf. Waler v. Lovett, 905 So. 2d 972, 973 (Fla. 5th DCA 2005) (holding that petition for dating violence injunction was sufficient where petitioner alleged that respondent had committed incidents of violence against her and had threatened her by telling “her that she was ‘dead’ ”). She…

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw