5D00-3419 Knecht v. Katz

State: Florida

Court: Florida Fifth District Court

Docket No: 5D00-3419 Knecht

Case Date: 05/28/2001

Preview:IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FIFTH DISTRICT JANUARY TERM 2001

JOSEPH KNECHT and LISA KNECHT, Appellants, v. HARRY KATZ, JR., and HEDRINA KATZ, Appellees. _________________________________/ Opinion filed June 1, 2001 Appeal from the Circuit Court for St. Johns County, Richard G. Weinberg, Judge. Michael L. Berry, Jr., of Anthony, Berry, DiRito & Goode, Ponte Vedra Beach, and Charles P. Pillans, III and Patrick P. Coll, of Bedell, Dittmar, DeVault, Pillans & Coxe, P.A., Jacksonville, for Appellants. Ada A. Hammond, of Johnston, Hammond & Burnett, Jacksonville, for Appellees. CASE NO. 5D00-3419

HARRIS, J. This is literally a barking dog case. Appellees sought injunctive relieve in regard to appellants' Great Pyrenees' constant barking while it was permitted to remain outside appellants' home. Appellees' request was to enjoin appellants from maintaining the dog on their property "in such manner as to create noise sufficient to impair Plaintiffs' peaceful and quiet enjoyment of their property." Instead, the trial court gave appellants 30 days to

remove the dog from their premises. We agree with appellants that the court went too far. In addition, it granted a remedy not sought by appellees. Appellees never complained that the dog disturbed them when it was within appellants' home. Some barking must be expected from dogs. Before appellants can be judicially required to remove their dog from their premises, they should be given the opportunity to cure the problem which disturbed appellees. The dog should not be permitted to remain outdoors unattended so that continuous barking might disturb the neighbors. However, if keeping the dog indoors or bringing the dog indoors when it starts barking will cure the problem, the injunction should go no further. REVERSED and REMANDED with instructions to amend the injunction in accordance with this opinion.

COBB and PALMER, JJ., concur.

2

Download 5D00-3419 Knecht v. Katz.pdf