The Florida appellate courts recently weighed in on a series of cases that offer key reminders—and some sharp warnings—for litigants and attorneys alike. From jurisdictional clashes between landlord/tenant law and domestic violence protections, to the consequences of ignoring release provisions in marital settlements, here are four notable decisions you should know.
🏠 1. Landlords Can’t Evict Around a Domestic Violence Injunction
Case: Castillo v. Aldahondo, 2025 Fla. App. LEXIS 4984
In Castillo, the landlord sought to evict a former romantic partner from the home they once shared. The wrinkle? The tenant had obtained a temporary domestic violence injunction that granted her exclusive possession of the residence.
The county court still granted the landlord possession—an error, according to the appellate court.
Key Holding: A county court lacks jurisdiction to override a circuit court’s domestic violence injunction under § 741.30. Even if the landlord has a valid claim under Florida’s landlord-tenant statutes, those rights yield when a DV injunction is in place.
Takeaway: Landlords must respect circuit court domestic violence rulings. Attempting an end-run via eviction in county court risks reversal and sanctions.
📜 2. You Can’t Re-Litigate a Consent Judgment Without Following the Rules
Case: Mickler v. Iizuka, 2025 Fla. App. LEXIS 4976
A former wife tried to bring tort claims against her ex-husband, despite a broad release of claims in their marital settlement agreement. Her attorney argued fraud as a justification—but no motion to set aside the consent judgment was filed, and a prior motion under Fla. R. Civ. P. 12.540(b) had been withdrawn.
The appellate court found this approach improper—and potentially sanctionable.
Key Holding: Courts cannot provide relief from a final consent judgment unless a proper motion is filed. Rule 57.105 sanctions may be warranted if claims are pursued without a factual or legal basis, especially when a release exists.
Takeaway: Consent judgments are not optional. If fraud is alleged, you must properly seek to vacate the judgment. Otherwise, relitigating settled claims risks sanctions for both client and counsel.
⛓️ 3. Contempt Orders Must Be Precise—and Coercive Orders Need a Key
Case: Makaver v. Pozuelos, 2025 Fla. App. LEXIS 4892
A trial court issued a contempt order, but couldn’t seem to decide whether it was civil or criminal in nature. The notice said “civil,” the oral ruling said “criminal,” and the written order contradicted both. Worse still, the coercive contempt order failed to include a purge provision—the key requirement that allows someone held in contempt to “unlock the jail cell” by complying with a condition.
Key Holding: A civil contempt order must have a purge provision. If the court’s findings and written order don’t align—or if the order is coercive without a clear escape clause—it’s legally defective.
Takeaway: Precision matters in contempt proceedings. Don’t blur the lines between civil and criminal, and always include a valid purge mechanism for compliance.
👨👧 4. Retroactive Child Support Can’t Cover Time When Parents Lived Together
Case: Frantz v. Crawford-Frantz, 2025 Fla. App. LEXIS 4985
The trial court ordered retroactive child support, but failed to exclude the period when the parents and child were all living under the same roof. The appellate court reversed.
Key Holding: Parents aren’t responsible for retroactive child support during periods they shared a household with the child. Courts must precisely identify when financial support was actually owed.
Takeaway: Retroactive child support requires a fact-specific analysis. Living together? No backpay.
Final Thoughts
These cases span several practice areas, but they share a common message: procedure matters. Whether you’re litigating landlord rights, enforcing judgments, pursuing contempt, or calculating child support, ignoring statutory limits and procedural safeguards can quickly undo your hard work.
Stay sharp, follow the rules, and when in doubt—file the right motion.
Brian Fell is a family law attorney and Florida Supreme Court Certified Family Mediator. He writes about Florida law and legal strategy with a focus on clarity, practicality, and justice.