CHRISTINA ROBINSON, APPELLANT,
v.
CARLOS R. VILLAREJO, APPELLEE
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.
Robinson appeals a final judgment of injunction for domestic violence protection entered against her at a hearing she did not attend, claiming she never received notice. The court reverses and remands for an evidentiary hearing on her lack-of-notice claim, finding the trial court erred by summarily denying her motion for rehearing without conducting such a hearing.
Yes. The trial court erred in summarily denying the motion for rehearing without affording Robinson an evidentiary hearing. The question of whether notice was received is of sufficient importance to justify an evidentiary hearing.
[1] A trial court must conduct an evidentiary hearing on a motion for rehearing that claims a lack of notice of a prior hearing that resulted in a judgment.
[2] A claim of lack of notice of a hearing is of sufficient import to justify an evidentiary hearing.
Previewing 2 of 3 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“the question of whether or not notice was received by the appellant or his attorney is of sufficient import to justify an evidentiary hearing”
Establishes the legal standard that claims of lack of notice warrant an evidentiary hearing before denial of a motion for rehearing.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceOn December 7, 2004, a trial court entered a final judgment of injunction for protection against domestic violence against Christina Robinson in favor…
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 Domestic Violence Injunction cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
In this appeal, Christina Robinson challenges a final judgment of injunction for protection against domestic violence and the trial court’s subsequent order denying her motion for rehearing, wherein she claimed a lack of notice of the hearing that resulted in the final judgment. -We reverse and remand for an evidentiary hearing on Robinson’s claim of lack of notice of the injunction hearing. .,
Following a December 7, 2004 hearing, at which the former wife and mother, Christina Robinson, and her counsel did not appear, the trial court entered a final judgment of injunction for protection against domestic violence against Robinson and in favor of appellee Carlos R. Villare-jo, the former husband and father. Robinson timely filed a motion for rehearing, arguing, among other things, that she had not received notice of the hearing that resulted in the judgment. The motion alleged that Robinson was never served with notice of the hearing; that the letter terminating the representation of her original counsel made no mention of the hearing; and that a review of the file conducted by her new counsel reflected no notice of the hearing. Attached to the motion was a print-out from the sheriffs office web site reflecting the mother had not been served with the “EXTENSION ON INJUNCTION W/PET & FIN.” Although nothing in the record refuted the claimed lack of notice, the trial court summarily denied the motion. In this appeal, Robinson insists the trial court should not have denied her motion for rehearing without affording her an evidentiary hearing. We agree. See Elmariah v. Assocs. Fin. Servs. Corp., 401 So. 2d 929, 929 (Fla. 2d DCA 1981) (reversing denial of motion for rehearing claiming lack of notice of hearing that resulted in judgment and stating “[t]he question of whether or not notice was received by the appellant or his attorney is of sufficient import to justify an evidentiary hearing”).
Accordingly, the order on appeal is reversed and the matter is remanded for an evidentiary hearing on Robinson’s claim that she did not receive notice of the hearing that resulted in the final judgment of injunction.
Reversed and remanded.
STEVENSON, C.J., FARMER, J., and MARX, KRISTA, Associate Judge, concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Ahmed M. Elmariah v. Assocs. Fin. Servs. Corp., 401 So. 2d 929 (Fla. 2d DCA 1981)