Whyce v. Petithome

FERNANDEZ, J. Rashad Whyce appeals a temporary injunction for protection against domestic violence, issued on October 29, 2015, pursuant to Florida Statute section 741.30. Whyce claims that the subject temporary injunction was issued after a full hearing, but that the trial court decided to simply extend the temporary injunction rather than enter a permanent injunction or decline to issue any injunction at all. The docket sheet contained in the record reflects an entry titled “DV Hearing,” dated October 29, 2015; however, there is no transcript of a hearing in the record, nor does the order on appeal • reflect that a hearing was held or that findings were made by the trial court. *686 Because the order on appeal does not comply with the requirements of section 741.30, Florida Statutes, reversal is warranted. The entry of an ex-parte temporary injunction pursuant to section 741.30, Florida Statutes, requires a future hearing date. See § 741.30(5)(c). The order on appeal does not contain a future hearing date, nor does it reflect that it is a good cause continuation of the hearing required by the statute. A careful review of the order suggests that it was the trial court’s intention to simply issue a temporary injunction for a fixed period of time. Nevertheless, section 741.30 “does not provide for the issuance of a series of temporary injunctions in lieu of a permanent injunction.” See Dietz v. Dietz, 127 So.3d 1279 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013) and Bacchus v. Bacchus, 108 So.3d 712 (Fla. 5th DCA 2013). Reversed and remanded.