MARIA GAGLIARDO, APPELLANT,
v.
IN RE THE MATTER OF THE BRANAM CHILDREN, 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.
Maria Gagliardo appeals from a trial court order restricting her distribution of information about children whose parents disappeared at sea, claiming the order violates her First Amendment rights. The appellate court reverses, holding that prior restraints on speech are presumed unconstitutional and that no exceptional circumstances existed to justify censoring the writer's ability to discuss information about the children and their family circumstances.
The court held that the order constitutes an unconstitutional prior restraint on speech. No exceptional circumstances existed to justify censoring the writer's ability to distribute information about the children or what happened to them and their family. The portion of the order restricting such distribution must be vacated.
[1] Prior restraints on speech and publication are presumed unconstitutional and are the most serious and least tolerable infringement on First Amendment rights.
[2] Exceptional cases are required to justify censorship of publication.
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“Prior restraints on speech and publication are the most serious and least tolerable infringement on First Amendment rights. As such, prior restraints are presumed unconstitutional.”
Establishes the strict constitutional standard applicable to prior restraints and the presumption against their validity.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAfter the children's parents disappeared at sea, their story received international media coverage. Maria Gagliardo, the children's great-grandfather'…
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 Prior Restraint cases and more on FLexlaw
Maria Gagliardo (“the writer”) appeals from a non-final order, restricting distribution of information relating to In Re the Matter of the Branam Children (“the children”). We reverse.
After the children’s parents disappeared at sea, their story garnered international media coverage. The writer, the children’s great grandfather’s companion, who considers herself family, wants to write a book about her life with the children and their parents’ disappearance.
Following the parents’ disappearance, several relatives petitioned for the children’s custody. After a hearing, the trial court awarded temporary custody to an aunt. The trial court, however, awarded the remaining relatives, including the writer, access to the children.
Thereafter, the aunt moved to clarify her rights and requested an order protecting the children’s privacy. At the hearing on the motion, the writer informed the trial judge about her plans to write a book. Thereafter, the trial court entered an order restricting all family members and the writer from distributing: (1) any photographs of the children, (2) information about the children, or (3) information about what has happened to them or to their family. The writer appealed.
On appeal, the winter asserts that the order violated her First Amendment rights to free speech. The children contend their privacy rights were properly protected. At oral argument, the children, however, confessed error on all grounds except public dissemination of unrestricted information about what happened to the children or to their family. We agree with the writer and reverse.
The standard of review for a pri- or restraint, such as this order, is de novo. See Post-Newsweek Stations Orlando, Inc. v. Guetzloe, 968 So.2d 608, 610 (Fla. 5th DCA 2007). Prior restraints on speech and publication are the most serious and least tolerable infringement on First Amendment rights. As such, prior restraints are presumed unconstitutional. Therefore, only in “exceptional cases,” will the courts consider censorship of publication acceptable. Guetzloe, 968 So.2d at 610.
We determine that this is not an “exceptional case” that triggers infringement on our precious First Amendment rights. Here, the order enjoined the writer from speaking about or publishing any information relating to the children and/or circumstances surrounding their parents’ widely publicized disappearance at sea. There were no exceptional circumstances present to justify censoring the writer. Thus, the trial court improperly entered this order.
Accordingly, we reverse and remand for the trial court to vacate the portion of the order that restricts the writer’s ability to distribute “information about the children or about what has happened to them or to their family.”
Reversed and remanded with instructions.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Delgado v. Miller (Fla. 3d DCA 2020)…ity; therefore, the party who seeks to have such a restraint upheld carries a heavy burden of showing justification for the imposition of such a restraint.” State v. McIntosh, 340 So. 2d 904, 908 (Fla. 1976). See also Gagliardo v. Branam Children, 32 So. 3d 673, 674 (Fla. 3d DCA 2010) (holding that prior restraints on speech and publication are presumed unconstitutional). Where a trial court imposes such restrictions on a party’s free speech rights, it must make findings that support the need for these lim…
Authorities Cited
- Post-Newsweek Stations Orlando, Inc. v. Guetzloe, 968 So. 2d 608 (Fla. 5th DCA 2007)