Can the Court Award Attorney Fees in a Domestic Violence Injunction Case?

Florida law creates a cause of action for an injunction for protection against domestic violence. A family or household member, who is either the victim of domestic violence or has reasonable cause to believe he or she is in imminent danger of becoming a victim of domestic violence, may petition for an injunction for the protection against domestic violence under Florida Statute Section 741.30.

Under Florida Statute Section 741.30(5)(a), if the court finds there is an immediate and present danger of domestic violence, it may grant a temporary injunction, pending a full hearing. Following a full hearing, if the court determines the petitioner is the victim of domestic violence or is in imminent danger of becoming a victim of domestic violence, the court may enter a final injunction.

If you were recently served with a petition for injunction against violence, then contact an experienced attorney at the Sammis Law Firm. We can help you fight false or exaggerated allegations. Call 813-250-0500.

Reasons the Court Might Award Attorney Fees

As a practical matter, it is difficult to get attorney fees in a typical domestic violence injunction case even when the respondent shows that that the allegations were false or exaggerated. The court is more likely to award attorney fees as a sanction when the petitioner engages in litigation misconduct by failing to appear for a deposition or otherwise intentionally frustrating the discovery process in the case.


Either way, when the respondent is awarded attorney fees, it is often a way for the record to show that the original claim was without merit, especially since an injunction for protection can never be sealed or expunged.

At the Sammis Law Firm, we are prepared to file a motion for attorney fees when we represent a respondent who prevails at a hearing or because the petitioner voluntarily dismisses the action prior to the hearing.

Attorney Fees under Section 57.105, F.S.

When appropriate, we can help you file a claim for attorney fees under Section 57.105, F.S., which authorizes the court to award reasonable attorney’s fees when the court finds the losing party or the losing party’s attorney should have known that a claim or defense presented to the court or at trial was either:

1. not supported by the material facts necessary to establish the claim or defense; or
2. would not be supported by the application of then-existing law to those material facts.

The Florida Supreme Court recently held that section 57.105 does not prohibit awarding attorney's fees in a section 784.046 action for dating violence, repeat violence, and sexual violence injunction proceedings under section 784.046, Florida Statutes. Lopez v. Hall, 233 So. 3d 451, 452 (Fla. 2018).

Prior to this decision, courts often found that there was no statutory authority to award attorney fees as sanctions in domestic violence proceedings because Section 741.30, F.S., did not expressly allow the award of attorney fees in domestic violence injunction hearings.

Now, however, Florida law is clear that the court does have the authority to order the petitioner to pay the respondent's reasonable attorney fees under Section 57.105 when the elements of that statute are satisfied.

Section 57.105, Florida Statutes, provides in pertinent part:

(1) Upon the court's initiative or motion of any party, the court shall award a reasonable attorney's fee, including prejudgment interest, to be paid to the prevailing party in equal amounts by the losing party and the losing party's attorney on any claim or defense at any time during a civil proceeding or action in which the court finds that the losing party or the losing party's attorney knew or should have known that a claim or defense when initially presented to the court or at any time before trial: 

     (a) Was not supported by the material facts necessary to establish the claim or defense; or 

     (b) Would not be supported by the application of then-existing law to those material facts.... 

(6) The provisions of this section are supplemental to other sanctions or remedies available under law or under court rules.

Attorney for Domestic Violence Injunction Cases in Tampa, FL

If you were served with a petition for an injunction for protection against domestic violence, dating violence, repeat violence, sexual violence, or stalking, then contact an experienced attorney who is focused on representing respondent facing false allegations.

We represent respondents who are accused of false allegations in an injunction for protection case in the courtrooms in Tampa and Plant City in Hillsborough County, FL.

We also represent clients in protective order hearings throughout the greater Tampa Bay area including Hernando County, Pasco County, Pinellas County, and Manatee County, FL.

This article was last updated on Friday, June 8, 2018.

What if the Stalker Files for a Stalking Protection Injunction?

If you ever want to find the crazy people then visit a courtroom for injunction hearings. In those courtroom you will find the most bizarre allegations of domestic violence. If you want to find the craziest people of all - wait for the neighbor vs. neighbor injunction hearings for "repeat violence" or "stalking."

Over the years I've defended more than my share of neighbor vs. neighbor injunction cases in Tampa and Hillsborough County, FL. I always represent the respondent in these cases. I'm morally opposed to representing a petitioner in an injunction case but particularly in a neighbor vs. neighbor case.

I've seen cases involving allegations of poisoning the cat, fighting over hanging tree limbs, letting chickens run free in the backyard, and making obscene gestures while looking out the kitchen window. The craziest cases always involve hours of blurry surveillance videos.

The individuals involved in these fights end up filing for an injunction because no law enforcement officer or prosecutor would believe their claims.

Most normal people have no idea that such a place exists. Who knew you could ask for an injunction for protection? Well, the crazy people know about it. The crazy people use that process when it suits them. The craziest people use the system to stalk and harass their victims.

Of course, hidden in the chaos are the few cases where a real victim actually needs help from the court. It's up to the judge to sort through it all.

Florida's New Staking and Cyberstalking Laws

The Florida legislature just added a new level of chaos to the process by introducing yet another category for protection injunctions - the stalking protection injunction. On October 1, 2012, House Bill 1099 for Stalking and Aggravated Stalking took effect. The bill makes a wide variety of changes to s. 784.048, F.S., the stalking statute, and s. 784.0485 for stalking protection injunctions.

If you thought the stalking definition was vague before, just wait until you read all the new provisions:

• It broadens the stalking-related definitions, primarily the definition of “credible threat.”

• It broadens the definition of "aggravated stalking."

• It creates a statutory cause of action for an injunction for protection against stalking and cyberstalking.

• It creates a new mechanism for collecting economic damages for an injury or loss that results from a violation of the stalking injunction.

• It creates a new first degree misdemeanor crime for violating an injunction against stalking or cyberstalking.

• It creates a new first degree misdemeanor crime for the respondent to have in his possession a firearm or ammunition after the issuance of an injunction for protection against stalking while that injunction is in effect.

• It requires the court, for any sentence, to consider issuing an injunction restraining a defendant from victim contact for up to ten years.

Injunction for Protection Against Stalking and Cyberstalking under §784.0485

Prior to the new law, a statutory cause of action did not exist specifically for protection against stalking or aggravated stalking. So if a person wanted an injunction based on stalking behavior then the person had to pursue injunctive relief through the domestic violence, dating violence or the repeat violence injunction statutes.

• Domestic violence injunctions required stalking or aggravated stalking resulting in physical injury or death of one family or household member by another member.

• Dating violence injunctions required stalking or aggravated stalking resulting in physical injury or death between individuals who have or have had a continuing and significant relationship of a romantic or intimate nature.

• Repeat violence injunctions require two incidents of stalking or aggravated stalking, one being within six months of the petition’s filing, which are directed against the petitioner or an immediate family member.

The new law in Florida creates a separate statutory cause of action for an injunction for protection against stalking and cyberstalking. It is similar to, but considerable broader than, the current causes of action for injunctions for protection against domestic violence, repeat violence, and dating violence.

Unlike other types of allegations in injunction for protection cases, allegations of stalking are particularly broad and just became even broader.

Making Stalking-Related Definitions Even More Vague

At the same time the legislature created an entire new category for protection injunctions, it also watered down the stalking-related definitions.

For instance, it substantively changes the definition of the term “credible threat” to “a verbal or nonverbal threat, or a combination of the two, including a threat delivered by electronic communication or a threat implied by a pattern of conduct, which places the person who is the target of the threat in reasonable fear for his or her safety or the safety of his or her family members or individuals closely associated with the person, and which is made with the apparent ability to carry out the threat to cause such harm.”

Now, Florida law provides that it is not even necessary to prove that the person making the threat had the intent to actually carry out the threat.

The law also deleted the prior language requiring that the threat be against the life of, or a threat to cause bodily injury to, a person.

The bill removes “intent to place the person in reasonable fear of death or bodily injury” as an element of aggravated stalking as defined in s. 784.048(3), F.S.

Consequently, under subsection (3), aggravated stalking occurs when a person willfully, maliciously, and repeatedly follows, harasses, or cyberstalks another person, and makes a credible threat to that person.

So now the focus is on the "fear for safety" of the complaining witness instead of the actual intentions of the person accused. When you add it all up, just about anything now constitutes stalking or cyberstaking.

Has anyone considered the fact that the stalkers will just use the new petitions for stalking protection injunctions to terrorize their victims? If you accept the fact that a person might stalk another person then why would you doubt the fact that a stalker will make false or exaggerated claims in a petition for a staking protection injunction?

The pendulum has swung too far.

Leslie Sammis fights to protect her clients in injunction hearings against false claims of domestic violence, repeat violence, dating violence and stalking at the courthouse in Tampa and Plant City for Hillsborough County, FL.