MICHAEL WEIMORTS, APPELLANT,
v.
WENDY SHOCKLEY, APPELLEE

Fla. 1st DCA | 2010-11-17
No. 1D10-2660
KAHN, VAN NORTWICK, and MARSTILLER, JJ., concur.
47 So. 3d 386 Florida District Court of Appeal, First District (2010) Positive Treatment
Cited by 1 case

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

Michael Weimorts appeals an order extending a temporary injunction for protection against dating violence, challenging the trial court's refusal to transfer venue from Okaloosa County to Walton County. The First District Court of Appeal reversed, holding that section 784.046 (dating violence injunctions) lacks a special venue provision and therefore must follow the general venue statute requiring actions be brought in the defendant's county of residence.


Holding

The trial court reversibly erred in refusing to transfer venue. Section 784.046 contains no special venue provision, so the general venue statute (section 47.011) applies, which requires actions be brought only in the county where the defendant resides, where the cause of action accrued, or where the property in litigation is located. Venue was proper only in Walton County, Weimorts' county of residence.


Headnotes

[1] Statutes providing for protective injunctions against dating violence, absent a specific venue provision, are governed by the general venue statute.

[2] The general venue statute requires actions to be brought in the county where the defendant resides, where the cause of action accrued, or where the property in litigation…

Previewing 2 of 5 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

“Because section 784.046, Florida Statutes (2009), providing for a protective injunction against dating violence, does not contain a special venue provision, the trial court was required to apply the general venue provision in section 47.011, Florida Statutes (2009).”

Establishes the controlling legal principle that absence of a special venue provision requires application of the general venue statute.

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

Michael Weimorts, a resident of Walton County, was sued by Wendy Shockley, a resident of Okaloosa County, for a protective injunction against dating v…

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
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

Michael Weimorts appeals an order extending a temporary injunction for protection against dating violence, entered the same day the court denied Weimorts’ motion to dismiss for improper venue. Because section 784.046, Florida Statutes (2009), providing for a protective injunction against dating violence, does not contain a special venue provision, the trial court was required to apply the general venue provision in section 47.011, Florida Statutes (2009). Barr v. Fla. Bd. of Regents, 644 So.2d 333, 335 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994). Under section 47.011, “[a]ctions shall be brought only in the county where the defendant resides, where the cause of action accrued, or where the property in litigation is located....” See Hill v. Fields, 813 So.2d 212, 213 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002) *387(holding that wife petitioning for domestic violence injunction was required to file in county of former husband’s residence and venue in county of wife’s residence was improper).1 Weimorts resides in Walton County, any cause of action accrued in Walton County, and the third option allowing venue where the property in litigation is located is not applicable. Thus, venue lies only in Walton County. As a result, the trial court reversibly erred in refusing to transfer venue from Okaloosa County, the residence of the complainant Wendy Shockley,2 to Walton County. Hill, 813 So.2d at 213.

REVERSED.

KAHN, VAN NORTWICK, and MARSTILLER, JJ., concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw