# Joseph Lawrence O'Neill v. Sara Skye Goodwin

> District Court of Appeal of Florida · June 29, 2016 · 195 So. 3d 411

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9824427

## Case

- **Full name:** Joseph Lawrence O’NEILL, Appellant, v. Sara Skye GOODWIN, Appellee
- **Court:** District Court of Appeal of Florida
- **Decided:** June 29, 2016
- **Citations:** 195 So. 3d 411; 2016 Fla. App. LEXIS 9991; 2016 WL 3534032
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Dissent by Conner
- **Judges:** Forst, Warner, Conner
- **Cited by:** 18 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9824427

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- stating that conduct is legitimate when there is a reason for it other than harassment

## Opinion text

CONNER, J.,
dissenting.
I respectfully dissent. The majority concludes that the evidence was insufficient to prove the grounds for an injunction. There are additional facts not mentioned in the majority opinion, which the majority does not feel are pertinent to the issue of whether the appellant’s conduct was sufficient to constitute stalking behavior justifying an injunction as provided by the statutes. I contend those facts are material, and the evidence proves, if not directly, then at least circumstantially, that the appellant’s behavior justifies an injunction. However, I do agree with the majority that some of the injunction prohibitions are overly broad and violate the appellant’s First Amendment right. Thus, I would affirm the entry of an injunction, but reverse and remand for the trial court to impose an injunction that does not unduly infringe on the appellant’s First Amendment rights.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9824427. Public record. Not legal advice.