Madan v. Madan

Robert MADAN, Appellant, v. Ivonne MADAN, Appellee.

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided February 17, 1999.

District Court of Appeal of Florida · decided 1999-02-17

Cited by 6 later decisions — most recently December 2012

6 state decisions

Key passage — most relied on by later courts

“trial court should have allowed the [movant] to present evidence regarding the initial procurement of the injunction.”

quoted by 1 later decision, including 977 So. 2d 702 - Betterman v. Kukelhan

“[e]ither party may move at any time to modify or dissolve the injunction,”

quoted by 1 later decision, including 842 So. 2d 281 - York v. McCarron

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1999-02-17

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1Steven N. Abramowitz, Miami, for appellant.

¶2Armando Montalvo, Coral Gables, for appellee.

¶3Before JORGENSON, GODERICH and SORONDO, JJ.

¶4PER CURIAM.

¶5The husband, Robert Madan, appeals from an order denying his motion to set aside a permanent injunction for protection against domestic violence. We reverse and remand with instructions.

¶6Because section 741.30(6)(b), Florida Statutes (1997), provides that "[e]ither party may move at any time to modify or dissolve the injunction," the trial court should have allowed the husband to present evidence regarding the initial procurement of the injunction. Without passing on the merits of the motion to dissolve the injunction, we reverse and remand to the trial court with instructions for a renewed hearing.

¶7Reversed and remanded with instructions.