Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Robert Sandonato v. Jose Guzman, 4D15-3191 (2016)

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida Number: 4D15-3191 Visitors: 7
Filed: Apr. 06, 2016
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOURTH DISTRICT ROBERT SANDONATO, Appellant, v. JOSE GUZMAN, Appellee. No. 4D15-3191 [ April 6, 2016 ] Appeal of a non-final order from the Circuit Court for the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, Broward County; Michael G. Kaplan, Judge; L.T. Case No. FMCE 98-005230. Robert Sandonato, Miami, pro se. No appearance for appellee. PER CURIAM. We affirm the trial court’s order denying appellant’s motion to vacate a permanent injunction allegedly entered in
More
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOURTH DISTRICT ROBERT SANDONATO, Appellant, v. JOSE GUZMAN, Appellee. No. 4D15-3191 [ April 6, 2016 ] Appeal of a non-final order from the Circuit Court for the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, Broward County; Michael G. Kaplan, Judge; L.T. Case No. FMCE 98-005230. Robert Sandonato, Miami, pro se. No appearance for appellee. PER CURIAM. We affirm the trial court’s order denying appellant’s motion to vacate a permanent injunction allegedly entered in 1998. Appellant has not shown any reversible error in the court’s order, and appellant has attempted to raise matters for the first time on appeal that he did not present below. On appeal, appellant alleges that he was advised by the circuit court clerk that the file for this 1998 case has been destroyed, yet he asserts that his prison classification officer has informed him that an injunction in this case impacts his eligibility for certain programs in prison. The circuit court’s online docket for this case reflects that a “temporary injunction” was entered in April 1998. Appellant’s motions to vacate or dissolve an injunction in the underlying case number may in fact be moot. Appellant should pursue administrative remedies within the Department of Corrections, and if necessary, obtain clarification from the circuit court as to whether any injunction order remains in force in this case. Affirmed. CIKLIN, C.J., TAYLOR and GERBER, JJ., concur. * * * Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing. 2
Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer